Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s opening bid to pay for his ambitious agenda provides the best opportunity in years to tackle property tax reform. The mayor’s gambit provides our elected leaders an opening to finally inject fairness into a system that is a thorn in everyone’s side.

By necessity, Mamdani’s calls for affordability would require property tax reform, and there is every indication the mayor will float a proposal in the days and weeks ahead. Just about everyone involved — real estate barons, small landlords, homeowners, and politicians from both political parties — largely agrees that New York City’s property tax system needs a makeover.

The mayor’s proposals to pay for his agenda appear aimed at forcing the issue. His strategy, which calls for a 9.5 percent increase in property taxes on all NYC real estate or a two percent income tax hike on roughly 34,000 individuals earning more than $1 million annually, is straightforward.  The play is to make tax hikes on high earners more palatable than the broader, extremely unpopular property tax increase.

New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin has already said the property tax proposal is dead on arrival, and last week the City Council countered with a budget proposal that focused on savings from efficiencies and reforms.

Governor Kathy Hochul, who is campaigning for reelection, and the State Legislature, which has a say in any tax hikes, have not fully endorsed the mayor’s tax increase on high earners. However, the specter of Mamdani’s tax proposals may open a pathway for property tax reform that has eluded prior New York City mayors.

Penalizing Poverty and Upholding Racial Disparities

New York City has an unacceptably regressive property tax structure. Reforms should include a combination of abolishing some abatements, increasing levies on vacant land, transitioning to a true-value land tax, and giving tax credits to homeowners and tenants alike.

My organization, the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), has published several studies and polls showing that the current property tax system penalizes poverty and upholds racial disparity. It punishes owners of multifamily apartments while charging high-value buildings a lower effective tax rate. It also rewards speculators who sit on vacant lots and underutilized land.

Single-family homes — including mansions and brownstones in neighborhoods like Forest Hills, Queens, and Prospect Park South, Brooklyn — have an effective tax rate 2.4 times lower than small rental buildings and more than five times lower than large rentals, a 2025 CSS study found. The last remaining predominantly Black neighborhoods in the city — Canarsie, East New York, and Cambria Heights — are paying tax rates double those paid in gentrified Park Slope or the East Village. 

The current real estate tax system dates to 1981, when the State Legislature passed a law dividing property in the city into four classes: residential properties with one to three units; residential properties with more than three units; utility company equipment and special franchise property; and all other real property, such as stores, offices, and factories.

The system is broken because New York City has not conducted a comprehensive, citywide property tax reassessment in decades. Instead, the system has relied on historically based assessments rather than current market values. As a result, there are wide disparities in what owners pay, both between property classes and from one neighborhood to the next.

A long list of New York City mayors have tackled, but failed to change, a property tax system they all agreed needed reform. David Dinkins named a commission that flatly concluded “the property tax in New York City not only appears unfair, it is unfair.” It called for uniform residential valuations. The report, however, was published two days before Dinkins left office.

Rudolph Giuliani shelved the Dinkins commission findings and, at the urging of the real estate lobby, won passage of a two-year tax abatement that helped apartment owners, which was repeatedly renewed.  Michael Bloomberg, who did not take up reforms, signed an 18.5 percent tax hike to close a $1 billion budget deficit.  Bill de Blasio appointed another commission that, late in his second term, recommended changes in the assessment methods for co-ops and condominiums and the removal of caps on tax increases for small homes. No changes were adopted.

Eric Adams floated a proposal that would have reduced tax rates for 275,000 households that coincidentally formed his political base in the eastern Bronx, eastern Queens, and southern Brooklyn. He then proposed tax rebates. Both plans, which faced intense criticism and legal challenges, were never enacted.

Now the property tax reform issue will test Mamdani’s leadership. Regardless of where lawmakers land on his funding proposals, now is the time for sorely needed reform — for once and for all.

As it stands, the database operates with too little transparency, too few safeguards, and too many unanswered questions. Thousands of New Yorkers, disproportionately Black and Latino youth, are included in this system, often without their knowledge, without being charged with a crime, and without a meaningful way to challenge their inclusion. The consequences are real and lasting: increased surveillance, barriers to housing and employment, and, in some cases, devastating impacts on immigration status.

Across the country, we have seen the tragic consequences of people being deported and imprisoned after tattoos were misinterpreted as gang symbols, despite having no criminal record. Consider the case of Neri José Alvarado Borges, a young asylum seeker who was deported to El Salvador and sent to a maximum-security prison not because he committed a crime, but because immigration officials misinterpreted an autism awareness tattoo as evidence of gang affiliation. He had no criminal record. His family and employer described him as a hardworking young man trying to build a life. Yet a subjective judgment about his appearance was enough to strip him of his freedom.

The concerns about the NYPD gang database are not new. In 2023, the Department of Investigation’s Office of the Inspector General for the NYPD issued a sweeping report identifying serious flaws in the database, including vague criteria for inclusion and a troubling lack of public transparency. The report put forward 17 recommendations for reform. A follow-up review released in 2025 found that only some reforms had been fully implemented, with others only partially completed. It also documented ongoing compliance failures, including the department’s failure to implement a multi-level review process to validate or renew entries.

As a candidate, Mayor Zohran Mamdani was against the NYPD gang database. He has recently expressed openness to its use if reforms are implemented. I strongly support this approach. When used responsibly, data can help law enforcement focus resources, prevent violence, and save lives. But the legitimacy of any such tool depends on public trust, and trust cannot exist without transparency and fairness.

The 2025 follow-up report makes clear that the most consequential reforms—those involving transparency, due process, and independent oversight—remain only partially implemented or not implemented at all. The City must commit to fully implementing all of the Inspector General’s recommendations, and doing so with complete transparency.

First and foremost, the criteria for inclusion must be publicly defined, narrowly tailored, and based on credible evidence—not vague associations, social media activity, or subjective interpretation. No young person’s future should be jeopardized because of who they know, what they wear, or how they express themselves.

Second, individuals must be notified if they are added to the database and given a meaningful opportunity to challenge that designation. Due process is not optional, it is a cornerstone of our legal system.

Finally, there must be regular, independent audits to ensure the database is accurate, up-to-date, and free from racial bias.

Reform is not about weakening public safety. It is about strengthening it. A system that is perceived as unjust will not earn the cooperation of the communities most affected by violence. A system that casts too wide a net will dilute its effectiveness. And a system that lacks accountability will ultimately fail.

The Mayor has an opportunity to ensure that the NYPD gang database becomes what it should be: a precise, fair, and transparent tool that helps keep New Yorkers safe without unfairly targeting innocent young people or derailing their futures.

David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years, and a member of the MTA Board. The views in this column are solely those of the writer. The New Majority is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s opening bid to pay for his ambitious agenda provides the best opportunity in years to tackle property tax reform. The mayor’s gambit provides our elected leaders an opening to finally inject fairness into a system that is a thorn in everyone’s side.

By necessity, Mamdani’s calls for affordability would require property tax reform, and there is every indication the mayor will float a proposal in the days and weeks ahead. Just about everyone involved — real estate barons, small landlords, homeowners, and politicians from both political parties — largely agrees that New York City’s property tax system needs a makeover.

The mayor’s proposals to pay for his agenda appear aimed at forcing the issue. His strategy, which calls for a 9.5 percent increase in property taxes on all NYC real estate or a two percent income tax hike on roughly 34,000 individuals earning more than $1 million annually, is straightforward.  The play is to make tax hikes on high earners more palatable than the broader, extremely unpopular property tax increase.

New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin has already said the property tax proposal is dead on arrival, and last week the City Council countered with a budget proposal that focused on savings from efficiencies and reforms.

Governor Kathy Hochul, who is campaigning for reelection, and the State Legislature, which has a say in any tax hikes, have not fully endorsed the mayor’s tax increase on high earners. However, the specter of Mamdani’s tax proposals may open a pathway for property tax reform that has eluded prior New York City mayors.

Penalizing Poverty and Upholding Racial Disparities

New York City has an unacceptably regressive property tax structure. Reforms should include a combination of abolishing some abatements, increasing levies on vacant land, transitioning to a true-value land tax, and giving tax credits to homeowners and tenants alike.

My organization, the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), has published several studies and polls showing that the current property tax system penalizes poverty and upholds racial disparity. It punishes owners of multifamily apartments while charging high-value buildings a lower effective tax rate. It also rewards speculators who sit on vacant lots and underutilized land.

Single-family homes — including mansions and brownstones in neighborhoods like Forest Hills, Queens, and Prospect Park South, Brooklyn — have an effective tax rate 2.4 times lower than small rental buildings and more than five times lower than large rentals, a 2025 CSS study found. The last remaining predominantly Black neighborhoods in the city — Canarsie, East New York, and Cambria Heights — are paying tax rates double those paid in gentrified Park Slope or the East Village. 

The current real estate tax system dates to 1981, when the State Legislature passed a law dividing property in the city into four classes: residential properties with one to three units; residential properties with more than three units; utility company equipment and special franchise property; and all other real property, such as stores, offices, and factories.

The system is broken because New York City has not conducted a comprehensive, citywide property tax reassessment in decades. Instead, the system has relied on historically based assessments rather than current market values. As a result, there are wide disparities in what owners pay, both between property classes and from one neighborhood to the next.

A long list of New York City mayors have tackled, but failed to change, a property tax system they all agreed needed reform. David Dinkins named a commission that flatly concluded “the property tax in New York City not only appears unfair, it is unfair.” It called for uniform residential valuations. The report, however, was published two days before Dinkins left office.

Rudolph Giuliani shelved the Dinkins commission findings and, at the urging of the real estate lobby, won passage of a two-year tax abatement that helped apartment owners, which was repeatedly renewed.  Michael Bloomberg, who did not take up reforms, signed an 18.5 percent tax hike to close a $1 billion budget deficit.  Bill de Blasio appointed another commission that, late in his second term, recommended changes in the assessment methods for co-ops and condominiums and the removal of caps on tax increases for small homes. No changes were adopted.

Eric Adams floated a proposal that would have reduced tax rates for 275,000 households that coincidentally formed his political base in the eastern Bronx, eastern Queens, and southern Brooklyn. He then proposed tax rebates. Both plans, which faced intense criticism and legal challenges, were never enacted.

Now the property tax reform issue will test Mamdani’s leadership. Regardless of where lawmakers land on his funding proposals, now is the time for sorely needed reform — for once and for all.

David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years. The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer. The Urban Agenda is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org.

The Mortgage Survey Report found that sales were up for buildings with rent-stabilized apartments, in terms of both the number of transactions and the average sales price. This demonstrates that real estate investors continue to view rent-stabilized housing as desirable commodities. In fact, the jump in prices was nearly twice as high for fully rent-stabilized buildings as for the overall stock of rental buildings with at least one stabilized unit. The percentage of non-performing loans is also down, suggesting that a declining share of owners is falling behind on their mortgage payments.

Meanwhile, the Price Index of Operating Costs report includes two important findings. The first is that operating cost increases are primarily driven by rising property tax assessments, which track with rising sales prices. Meanwhile, the second largest leap in operating costs (after fuel) came from rising insurance prices—a problem that is affecting multifamily housing across the country and must be addressed through public policy interventions rather than rent increases.

Together, these two reports indicate that building owners’ fortunes remain favorable. Board members can interpret this data as a strong signal that landlords do not need another rent increase.

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion a more equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. www.cssny.org 

### 

April 2, 2025

New York — A statement from the leadership of the Community Service Society of New York, Riders Alliance, and the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA:

"The New York City Council has put forth a bold vision to make transit more affordable for the New Yorkers who need it most. As researched, Fair Fares is already essential for hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers, but expanding benefits and reforming the enrollment process would take it from a good idea to a truly transformative program. Including New Yorkers at or below 300% of the Federal Poverty Level — to finally include those making minimum wage — is another necessary step we look forward to seeing. The Community Service Society, the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA, and Riders Alliance applaud Speaker Menin and Council Leadership for their willingness to put riders' needs first."

This is no “April Fools” joke. This is the reality of devastating federal funding cuts under H.R.1.  As a result, healthcare costs for nearly a half a million mostly citizen New Yorkers and some lawfully present immigrants will become unaffordable unless Albany lawmakers take steps to fill the coverage gap. Legislation proposed by State Senator Rivera, Chair of the Senate Health Committee, and Assembly Member Paulin, Chair of the Assembly Health Committee, will ensure that half a million New Yorkers will keep their coverage. 

Joining the health committee chairs today were, Assembly Member Karines Reyes, Chair of the Puerto Rican/Hispanic Task Force, other elected officials and healthcare advocates from across the state who have been sounding the alarm about the implications of major coverage losses for New Yorkers unless the coverage gap created by H.R. 1 is addressed in the upcoming state budget.  

In short, the legislation (S.9589/Assembly number pending, Paulin) amends the social services law to ensure continuity of coverage for approximately 450,000 citizen and immigrant New Yorkers with incomes up to 250 percent of FPL.  It also amends the public health law to establish and administer a state-only funded premium assistance program for lawfully present immigrants who will lose their federal premium assistance come January 1st.  

“About 450,000 New Yorkers, largely working-class families, will lose health coverage due to H.R.1. This is not surprising coming from a federal administration that would rather give tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy than make our healthcare system more affordable,” said Gustavo Rivera, Chair of the Senate Health Committee and prime sponsor of S.9589. “In New York, we value our immigrant communities because they are our neighbors, they strengthen our economy, and addresses workforce challenges. We know that our healthcare ecosystem depends on every New Yorker having healthcare coverage. This legislation provides affordable coverage options to lawfully present immigrant populations and working families losing their insurance access so we can mitigate the harm on those impacted by federal cuts to our healthcare system.”  

“New York has a proud tradition of a having a high rate of health insurance coverage. In light of recent federal action, it is time to step up and find a way to ensure that New Yorkers are covered,“ said Assembly Member Amy Paulin. “As the State Assembly Health Chair, I have introduced legislation to achieve that aim and look forward to working with all my colleagues on this vital issue.”  

“As the federal administration continues its unconscionable assault on immigrant populations, legislators throughout New York must take a stand to mitigate the harm devastating these communities,” said Assemblywoman Michaelle C. Solages, Chair of the New York State Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic and Asian Legislative Caucus. “HR 1 will strip health coverage from 480,000 New Yorkers beginning July 1st including 30,000 residents in my own district. While the return to the Basic Health Program is a critical first step, it is not enough. That is why I am proud to co-sponsor this forthcoming legislation, which will take three concrete steps to strengthen access to health coverage and ensure that our most vulnerable residents are not abandoned in the face of these federal cuts.” 

“Before taking the oath of office, I put on scrubs and cared for patients as a nurse at Montefiore Hospital in the Bronx. I still return to the hospital monthly, to provide routine care for our community.  There are times when some of my patients are just one illness or missed paycheck away from a financial crisis,” said Assembly Member Karines Reyes, R.N., Chair of the Puerto Rican/Hispanic Task Force. “I’ve seen firsthand how drastic cuts to public health programs can delay care, worsen outcomes, and even fatally alter the course of a patient's treatment plan. Those most vulnerable to these cutbacks are the immigrant and working-class families, who so often face severe barriers to care due to enduring medical marginalization. This legislation is a critical step to mitigate the damage caused by H.R.1 so that we may protect access to care, strengthen community health systems, and ensure that no one in our state is forced to choose between their health and their livelihood.” 

“Our communities should never have to worry about losing access to health care because of harmful federal policy changes. But because of H.R. 1, as many as 1.5 million New Yorkers, could lose their health coverage in the coming years unless we act. This bill is a critical step to protect families who rely on reduced-cost and subsidized health insurance and to ensure our neighbors are not pushed out of coverage because of harmful federal policy changes. Our communities deserve stability, dignity, and the peace of mind that they will still be able to see a doctor and care for their families,” said Assembly Member Jessica González-Rojas. 

“We cannot allow Donald Trump to strip New Yorkers of their healthcare coverage,” said Assembly Member Micah Lasher. “This legislation is about stepping up where Washington has stepped back to keep New Yorkers covered and ensure continuity of care. New York has both the responsibility and the ability to act, and we must do so in this year’s budget.” 

“The imminent loss of health insurance will be a fiscal crisis for 450,000 New Yorkers and their families due to the stratospherically high health care costs in our state,” said Elisabeth R. Benjamin, Vice President of Health Initiatives at the Community Service Society of New York, “New York is lucky to have extraordinary leaders such as Senator Rivera and Assemblymember Paulin willing to champion their case in this year’s budget negotiations.  Health care affordability is top of mind right now for New Yorkers and the time is now – our leaders must act to provide affordable coverage for those about to lose it.” 

“New York is one of the richest states in the country—there is no excuse for 480,000 people to lose their health coverage," said Ursula Rozum, Co-Director of Campaigns’ Organizing at Citizen Action of New York. "We fought for years to expand care for working families, and we will not accept it being ripped away. Going backwards is a choice, and it’s the wrong one. State leaders must act now to protect coverage and ensure every New Yorker keeps the care they need. Anything less is a failure of leadership.” 

“Community Health Centers are already operating on razor-thin margins, caring for one in every eight New Yorkers, whether they have insurance coverage or the ability to pay. Federal actions now threaten to strip coverage from more than a million people, further straining an already stretched system. We strongly support New York’s efforts to ensure no one loses coverage as a result of HR1 and to provide affordable options for the nearly half a million New Yorkers who stand to lose Essential Plan coverage on July 1. Assemblywoman Amy Paulin and Senator Rivera’s legislation is a critical step to protect patients and support the safety net, while reaffirming our commitment to healthcare as a right, not a privilege” said Rose Duhan, President and CEO at Community Health Care Association of NYS.   

“Around a half a million New Yorkers are about to lose their health coverage because politicians in Washington would rather fund the detention of our neighbors and wars around the world than ensure that everyone has the ability to lead a healthy life,” said Becca Telzak, Deputy Director at Make the Road New York. "Luckily, our elected officials in Albany can act to protect our access to healthcare. By restoring these funds, we can ensure that nobody has to choose between putting food on the table and visiting a doctor.”  

“Across New York, United Ways and the 211 networks see every day how fear and instability undermine the wellbeing of children and families,” said Therese Daly, President & CEO at United Way of New York State & 211 New York. “When parents and caregivers are at risk of detention or deportation without access to legal support, entire communities feel the impact—from lost income to disrupted education and increased strain on social services.  Protecting immigrant families is not only the right thing to do—it is essential to building a stronger, healthier New York for all.” 

“The New York Coalition for Affordable Hospitals, made up of labor unions, healthcare providers, community organizations, employers, and social justice advocates, is committed to ensuring that every New Yorker as access to affordable healthcare,” said Samantha Harpool, Campaign Coordinator at 32BJ Labor Industry Cooperation Fund. “We cannot let 480,000 people lose access to care, especially when healthcare costs are rising with no end in sight. We need to address to the root cause of rising healthcare prices, not cut coverage for those who need it most.”   

“The time is now to protect the health care of the people at risk of losing insurance coverage,” said Lara Kassel, Coalition Coordinator at Medicaid Matters New York. “We know there is enough money to do what we need to do to make sure almost half a million New Yorkers - our neighbors, family members, friends, and constituents in every legislative district across the state - don't become uninsured.”  

“It is a fundamental responsibility of Gov. Hochul and the New York State Legislature to ensure that every New York resident has access to health insurance coverage that is both affordable and offers quality coverage,” said Charles King, Chief Executive Officer at Housing Works. 

“New York must do all it can to protect healthcare access for our local small business owners and their employees, particularly those who may lose coverage because of HR 1 or because of their status as immigrants,” said Lindsey Vigoda, New York Director at the Small Business Majority. “After all, research conducted by Small Business Majority and Georgetown University found that one-third of all people enrolled in Medicaid have a connection to a small business -- a population now at risk of losing coverage due to federal action. Meanwhile, immigrants are twice as likely to start a small business as native-born citizens, and they own a significant percentage of the businesses typically found on Main Streets such as dry cleaners, clothing stores and restaurants. Given these realities, it's clear that small businesses and their employees will be at risk if New York doesn't step up to address the healthcare needs of our small business community.” 

“H.R.1 will soon have devastating consequences for New York unless state leaders act quickly. According to the Department of Health, 1.5 million New Yorkers could become uninsured in the coming years, with more than 440,000 people including 404,000 citizens and 40,000 immigrants set to receive termination notices as soon as April 2026. The harm will ripple across every community in our state, said Karina Albistegui Adler, Director of Health Justice at New York Lawyers for the Public Interest. “Millions of New Yorkers live in mixed‑status households, and our economy depends on immigrant labor. Allowing hundreds of thousands of people to lose medical coverage would be shortsighted and dangerous. New York has long led the nation in expanding health coverage to immigrant communities, and it must continue that leadership now. By investing less than $1 billion annually, the state can protect coverage for our communities and ensure that health care remains a right, not a privilege, for all New Yorkers." 

“The entertainment industry is an economic powerhouse in NY – generating upwards of $100B annually for the State. And, yet, workers in the industry often lack reliable access to health insurance,” said Jim Bracchitta, Managing Director of Health Services at Entertainment Community Fund. “That’s why protecting programs like the Essential Plan are so important to the health and well-being of these hard-working New Yorkers. As thousands of them stand to lose coverage, we need New York’s legislative leaders to stand up for their protection. The only way for the arts to contribute to the economic health of NY is to make sure those who make art stay healthy.” 

“New York has a responsibility—and a proven history—of ensuring people don’t lose their health coverage when federal policy falls short,” said Lindsay Miller, Executive Director at the New York Association on Independent Living. “We urge state leaders to take swift budget action to safeguard affordable insurance for nearly half a million New Yorkers.” 

“Cabrini Immigrant Services of NYC joins our partners in urging New York State leadership to take immediate action to ensure that no New Yorker – immigrant or citizen – loses the healthcare coverage they depend on due to federal cuts. HR 1 puts coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of lawfully present immigrants across New York, and the consequences will be felt across our communities, said Ella Nimmo, Director of Community Programs & Development at Cabrini Immigrant Services of NYC, Inc. “Every day, CIS-NYC staff sit across from New Yorkers who rely on that coverage to access primary care, afford medications, manage chronic conditions, and simply stay healthy to work and care for their families. As a state that has consistently led the way in ensuring immigrants have access to healthcare, New York must continue to lead in the face of the federal government’s failure to care for our communities.” 

“For the 1.8 million New Yorkers living with a rare disease, Medicaid is a vital source of healthcare coverage,” said Bob Graham, Policy Coordinator at the New York State Rare Disease Collaborative. “Properly funding Medicaid is more than a budgetary decision; it is a reflection of our shared New York value of placing the well-being of people first. A robust Medicaid program in an investment that ensures people - no matter how rare their condition - has the coverage and stability they need to live, work, and contribute to our communities.” 

“CACF proudly supports Assemblymember Amy Paulin’s bill designed to mitigate the dangerous impact of H.R.1,” said Anita Gundanna and Vanessa Leung, Co-Executive Directors of the Coalition for Asian American Children and Families. “New York has spent nearly two decades closing the insurance gap and we must ensure that progress — which greatly benefited Asian American and Pacific Islander New Yorkers — is not lost. Our state must continue to lead the way as we push back against federal cuts to healthcare coverage.”   

“Nearly half a million New Yorkers are at risk of losing their health coverage. As a national leader in expanding access to healthcare, it is imperative that New York continues to lead the way by taking action on behalf of families, workers, and our neighbors who are faced with a dimming reality of unaffordable health coverage. The proposals put forth offer the opportunity to maintain and protect coverage for those at risk. We urge state leaders to act decisively so no one is left behind," said Bethsy Morales-Reid, Vice President for Program Strategy and Impact for Hispanic Federation.   

"Primary care is the foundation of a strong and equitable health care system. It is the only part of the health care system proven to increase life expectancy, reduce costs and lower inequities,” said Aparna Mekala, CEO of Primary Care Development Corporation. “With over 7 million New Yorkers covered by Medicaid, the program is a vital source of life-saving primary care. If hundreds of thousands of people lose their insurance coverage, diseases like heart disease and diabetes will be left untreated, causing avoidable deaths to increase and lead to unhealthier communities that will further strain our emergency rooms and our economy. With an unprecedented number of uninsured New Yorkers seeking health care, an extra burden will be placed on already understaffed and underfunded Community Health Centers.  Our state leaders must ensure that those expected to lose coverage as a result of HR1 are made whole, including those in immigrant communities, so they can maintain access to the primary care that can save their lives.”   

Washington Republicans have turned their backs on nearly half a million New Yorkers who are counting on their health coverage to survive - we hope Governor Hochul and legislators will not do the same. For our members, who are older and disabled New Yorkers, home care workers and family caregivers, losing Medicaid isn't just a policy setback; it's a threat to their ability to stay in their homes and give and receive care,” said Ilana Berger, Director at NY Caring Majority. “New York has the resources and roadmap to fight back, and we're calling on Governor Hochul and the legislature to include these critical fixes in the final state budget. This moment demands courage, and the NY Caring Majority will stand with every New Yorker fighting to keep the coverage they need and deserve.” 

“New York can continue to lead the way in health care access and seize this opportunity to keep nearly 500,000 New Yorkers from losing their health insurance and protect their long-term physical and financial health,” said Fred Riccardi, President at the Medicare Rights Center. 

"Since COVID, we have seen how disparities in access to healthcare can have a drastic impact on our immigrant communities,” said Emira Habiby Browne, Founder and CEO at the Center for the Integration and Advancement of New Americans, Inc. “As the federal government continues to slash funding for health insurance, New York has a responsibility to protect the health of all its residents, no matter their country of origin. Maintaining the Essential Plan, establishing ACA premium assistance, and enacting health coverage for DACA recipients will save the lives of hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers, but only if our state leaders include it in the coming year’s budget." 

“Many Essential Plan members are people with disabilities who transitioned off Medicaid in order to maintain the coverage or care providers they rely on to work,” said Stephanie Orlando, Chief Executive Officer at Western New York Independent Living, Inc. “New York should ensure that these members can keep the health insurance they need to stay employed, and support people with disabilities who depend on consistent care to live independently in their communities.” 

"Young adults (18-34) and all New Yorkers, regardless of background, need and deserve truly affordable health care coverage,” said Professor Sean Henry Miller, Northeast Regional Director at Young Invincibles. “Now, our health care funding, our coverage, and our health itself are under attack. Young Invincibles was founded on ensuring health care access and equity for our marginalized age group by a group of passionate grad. students, over 15 years ago. We now call on our leaders at every level to ensure coverage becomes a right for all; not a privilege for some, despite profit-driven political attacks on our communities." 

 “The impact of H.R.1 on New Yorkers will be devastating, threatening decades of progress in expanding access to life-saving health care. Cuts to coverage jeopardize the health and wellbeing New Yorkers across the state, including immigrants and children who will lose care as a result of their parents’ coverage loss," said Raysa S. Rodriguez, Executive Director, Citizens' Committee for Children of New York. "At the same time, state leaders have a critical opportunity to act. As New York transitions back to the Basic Health Program, New York must advance state-funded coverage options to protect the 480,000 New Yorkers who will lose care if action is not taken now.”   

“The Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY) supports the human right for all people to have access to physical and mental healthcare. In order for the body and mind to work in harmony, people must have access to preventative healthcare,” said Sharon McLennon Wier, Ph.D., MSEd., CRC, LMHC, Executive Director of CIDNY. 

“NY leaders must act immediately to protect New Yorkers from senseless, deadly federal healthcare cuts. Our physicians and medical students see every day that healthcare is out of reach in our country--for elders and children, working people, New Yorkers who have insurance. It is unfathomable that our leaders would allow more of us to get sick and die from preventable illnesses as insurance companies rake in ever-mounting piles of cash. We urge you to include in the FY 2026-27 budget the stopgap measures outlined in this letter to maintain and expand insurance coverage for low income and immigrant New Yorkers and establish a financial assistance program in the short term. Ultimately, we must pass the New York Health Act to ensure that every New Yorker gets the comprehensive healthcare they need without cost or other insurance barriers, regardless of immigration status, while saving the state billions annually. Inaction by New York’s leaders is unacceptable and an equivalent betrayal to initiating the federal healthcare cuts," said Morgan Moore, Executive Director at Physicians for a National Health Program — New York Metro Chapter. 

“We have heard Governor Hochul repeatedly tell us that our families are her fight. This a lovely sentiment, but until it is coupled with concrete actions – it is just that,” said Andrea Champlin, Advocacy & Support Specialist for the Finger Lakes Independence Center. “Now is the time for New York State to step into the ring and ensure half a million New Yorkers do not lose their health coverage.” 

"New York has always been a leader in ensuring access to care and must continue to do everything in its power to provide affordable healthcare options for all New Yorkers," said Lisa Rivera, president and CEO of the New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG). "We urge Gov. Hochul and members of the State legislature to take immediate action to preserve access to health coverage for the nearly half a million New Yorkers who are set to lose coverage under HR 1 by returning to the Basic Health Program. It's not just the right thing to do; ensuring affordable access to healthcare also strengthens our economy, our communities and our entire state."   

"Losing access to health care harms vulnerable populations and places severe strain on community providers. As a provider of health care and housing, we see that coverage loss leads to delayed care, worsening health, and deeper instability, especially for those experiencing homelessness. The loss of primary and preventive care drives complications from untreated conditions, increases reliance on emergency rooms, raises health care costs, and further strains already limited hospital resources, which fuels a broader public health crisis. Federal changes threaten to deepen these inequities, demanding immediate state action to preserve coverage and strengthen community health. New York must act now to prevent these losses, protect vulnerable residents, and reduce homelessness," said Jonathon Santos-Ramos, Executive Director at Care For the Homeless.   

"The NYWFP applauds Senator Rivera and Assembly Member Paulin for stepping up to protect healthcare for New Yorkers. Over 400,000 New Yorkers could lose coverage due to Donald Trump and Congressman Lawler's dangerous “Big Beautiful Bill.”  S9589 Rivera / Paulin will ensure New Yorkers keep their health insurance including our immigrant neighbors. This is a critical measure to help address the affordability crisis working families are dealing with across the state. The NYWFP strongly encourages state leaders and lawmakers to sign on and champion this bill; all New Yorkers deserve quality healthcare," said NY Working Families Party State Director Jasmine Gripper 

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion a more equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. www.cssny.org  

NEW YORK, NY — The Community Service Society of New York (CSS), in partnership with the Progress and Poverty Institute, the Center for Land Economics, and the Fiscal Policy Institute, today released a new brief, NY Renters and Homeowners Want Property Tax Reforms Now. Drawing on CSS’s 2025 Annual Survey of Housing and Economic Security, the report finds that New Yorkers across the state are calling for a fundamental shift in how property is taxed to address the state's affordability crisis. 

The report demonstrates broad public support, both city and statewide, for property tax reform, and specifically singles out the authorization of Land Value Taxation (LVT) as done in bill A.3339B/S.1131B. An LVT shifts the property tax burden from the building to the land, leading to more fairness and efficient use of precious high-value space. The survey results are a clarion call for state policymakers and City Hall to finally address the fifty years of NYC overtaxing tenants and low-income communities of color. 

Key Findings 

• Majority Support for Land Value Tax (LVT): Fifty-two (52) percent of New Yorkers statewide support shifting the tax burden from buildings to land value to discourage speculation and encourage housing construction. When excluding "unsure" respondents, support for LVT exceeds 80 percent across the state. 
• Widespread Perception of Inequity: New Yorkers across income levels and housing tenures view the current system as unfair. Notably, 51 percent of higher-income residents and 59 percent of Manhattanites—the primary beneficiaries of current condo/co-op valuation loopholes—support reforming those assessments to ensure high-value units pay their fair share. 
• Renters Recognize the "Hidden Tax": Ninety-three (93) percent of market-rate renters in NYC understand that property tax increases are passed on to them by landlords. This underscores that property tax reform is not just a homeowner issue but a critical factor in renter affordability. 

This survey brief builds off the findings of the March 2025 joint report, Footing the Bill, which documented how New York City's tax structure has historically overtaxed tenants and low-income communities of color while allowing land speculators to remain lightly taxed. While previous attempts to overhaul the system have stalled under previous administrations, Mayor Zohran Mamdani campaigned on addressing inequities in the city’s property tax structure. Against this backdrop, and with Albany seeking to address affordability for everyday New Yorkers, the authorization of a Land Value Tax—and other changes—represents a shift away from structural features where speculators win while working families pay the bill. 

Key Recommendations 

• Authorize Land Value Taxation (Bills A3339B / S1131B): Grant New York City and other municipalities the legal authority to tax land at a higher rate than improvements to incentivize the development of vacant or underused lots, making housing more affordable for renters, and bring relief to middle class homeowners. 
• Repeal Section 581(1)(a) of the RPTL: Eliminate the "valuation ceiling" that requires condominiums and co-ops to be assessed as rental properties rather than at their actual market value, a practice that currently results in massive tax breaks for luxury units. 
• Expand the Renter’s Tax Credit: Establish a meaningful, refundable tax credit for rent-burdened tenants to bring their relief to parity with programs currently available to homeowners. 

“A split rate or land value tax strategy could be a great tool to deliver tax fairness and promote economic development. By giving municipalities the freedom to implement this type of tax, we can spur the construction of housing that we desperately need in a way that promotes the highest, best use of land - building the type of walkable, affordable, thriving communities we want to see,” said New York State Senator Rachel May. “We see new housing pressure, especially in Syracuse, with rising rents and increased homelessness. At the same time, we see vacant or underused lots in high-demand areas, which increases the tax burden on homes in residential neighborhoods. By passing this bill this year we can give municipalities the chance to rethink property taxes, delivering relief and economic growth. Thank you much to CSS and partners for writing this great brief to highlight the support for and potential of property tax reform.”  

"New York faces an affordability crisis and our current tax system penalizes housing construction and rewards land speculation, driving up rents and forcing people out of our state,” said New York State Assemblymember Alex Bores. “With study after study confirming that the poorest New Yorkers bear the brunt of our broken system, it’s time for a change. Land value taxes should be a large part of the solution."  

“For more than a decade CSS has used polling to track the needs and opinions of poor and working-class families and the impacts of New York’s policies on them,” said David R. Jones, CSS President and CEO. “With this most recent survey, we have as a state, for the first time, a real understanding of not only how property tax systems are impacting residents—from their point of view—but also what solutions they’d like to see advanced.” 

"Across the country, states are considering revenue-neutral land value tax reforms as a pragmatic way to ease rental pressure while working families struggle with rising housing costs. Shifting taxes from buildings to land discourages speculation and puts underused land to work for the public good,” said Greg Miller, Co-Founder & Executive Director for Center for Land Economics. “This polling by CSS-NY confirms that New York renters and homeowners alike recognize the importance of smart tax policy that returns the value of land to the communities that create it." 

"New York is a city of renters and apartments, so it is unfair and absurd that it overtaxes towers and under taxes single family homes,” said Stephen Hoskins, Director of Community Research & Engagement at the Progress and Poverty Institute. “NYC should flip that script with a land value tax, which taxes land speculators while rewarding the condos and coops that keep New York affordable."  

“Property tax reform that ensures economic justice must be a key priority for City and State lawmakers. Further, we must reform the property tax system to incentivize the development of new and high-quality housing options for people all across the income distribution,” said Emily Eisner Acting Executive Director and Chief Economist Fiscal Policy Institute. “This report demonstrates that New Yorkers all across the state can see and feel that the current property tax system has not achieved these two goals. It’s past time to improve the progressivity of the property tax system and build a system that serves all New Yorkers, not just the most affluent." 

“In order to address our affordability crisis, we must build more housing and ensure we aren’t overtaxing tenants. A Land Value Tax would discourage real estate speculation and encourage building the housing that New Yorkers desperately need,” said Annemarie Gray, Executive Director of Open New York. “Our property tax system should not overtax tenants just because they don't see the tax bill—the cost is still passed on through higher rents. We must implement a fairer and more equitable property tax system as part of an all-of-the-above approach to solving our housing shortage." 

“From Canarsie to Rosedale, East NY to Washington Heights, the inequity in NYC’s property tax system is no secret,” said Iziah Thompson, CSS Senior Policy Analyst and author of the report. “For decades, middle class homeowners, mostly of color have born the brunt of this inequity, but reforms have stalled. Now, we are in a moment where renters are more conscious than ever of the costs of rental properties incur and how those costs can impact their rents. This realization makes it possible to build a strong coalition of renters and homeowners who can organize and fight to finally win property tax fairness.”

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion a more equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. www.cssny.org 

718-309-2346 / jmaclin@cssny.org

Today’s Rent Guidelines Board meeting revealed two stark facts: rent-stabilized landlords continue to profit, while rent-stabilized tenants continue to struggle.

The Board’s 2026 Income and Expense report—presented today at its first Public Meeting of 2026—shows that Net Operating Incomes (NOI, or landlords’ incomes minus operating expenses) rose by 6.2 percent, on top of last year’s 12.1 percent increase and the previous year’s 10.4 percent jump, compounding and combining into an overall NOI growth of more than 30 percent over the past three years.

Adjusting for inflation and looking over the long-term, rent-stabilized landlords’ average NOI has gone up by 56.6 percent since 1990. Meanwhile, over the past year, rent stabilized building distress levels stayed steady, rent collection rates rose across the city, and operating costs grew at a slower pace. Taken together, the Board’s data does not point to any need for a rent increase.

Meanwhile, Community Service Society of New York (CSS) senior policy analysts Oksana Mironova and Samuel Stein presented on the findings from CSS’s most recent Annual Survey of Housing and Economic Security, a scientific survey of New Yorkers conducted in summer, 2025. The survey found that low-income rent stabilized tenants are struggling financially. Sixty-seven percent struggle to make ends meet, 83 percent have little-to-no savings, and 55 percent probably could not afford to cover a $400 unexpected expense. When asked what issue they would most like New York City leaders to focus on, a majority (56 percent) chose “Reducing the cost of housing.”

Today’s presentations made clear that while rent-stabilized landlords are continuing to do good business, rent-stabilized tenants are struggling to make ends meet.

Watch the RGB meeting on YouTube.

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion a more equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. www.cssny.org 

###

A new proposed rule from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development would deny housing assistance to families with mixed immigration status—households where some members are citizens or have legal status and others do not. Today, these families can remain together in subsidized housing with assistance prorated only for those who qualify. The new rule would effectively end that policy, forcing families to separate or lose their homes.

The cruelty is as obvious as the consequences.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CDBC) estimate that nearly 80,000 people (including about 37,000 children) could lose their housing assistance if this rule is finalized. Many of these children are U.S. citizens. Their only “crime” would be living in a family that includes someone without eligible immigration status.

New York would be disproportionately affected by the rule, as it is home to the largest share—about 13 percent—of mixed-status households receiving federal housing assistance of any state. According to the CDBC, an estimated 2,540 mixed-status families would be barred from help in New York. The damage would fall disproportionately on Hispanics who make up the largest immigrant population in the city and are heavily represented among low-income renters who depend on federal housing assistance to stay afloat.  For many of these families, losing housing support would mean facing an impossible choice: separated from loved ones or risk homelessness.

Let’s be clear about what the policy would actually do. It would deny housing assistance even to eligible family members—including U.S. citizens—if someone in the household lacks qualifying immigration status. In other words, a citizen child could lose stable housing simply because a parent is undocumented.

The Trump administration claims this rule is about fairness and protecting taxpayer resources. But immigrants already contribute billions in taxes every year. In 2023, immigrant New Yorkers paid more than $70 billion in taxes and generated about $160 billion in spending power, according to the American Immigration Council. And people without legal status have never been eligible for housing assistance themselves. Under current policy, the government simply adjusts the subsidy so that only eligible members receive support.

What the new rule does instead is weaponize housing policy to target immigrant families.

The broader consequences would be devastating. Housing instability increases the risk of eviction, homelessness, and family separation. Children forced to move frequently suffer academically and emotionally. Communities lose stability. Cities like New York, which already facing a severe housing affordability crisis, would see even more pressure on shelters and social services.

When the Trump administration first proposed a similar rule in 2019, it sparked immediate legal challenges from states, cities, and housing advocates across the country. Ultimately, the policy was never implemented. New York helped lead that fight then, and it must do so again now. With more mixed-status families receiving federal housing assistance than any other state, New York has both the most at stake and the clearest responsibility to stand up for the thousands of New Yorkers who would be pushed toward housing instability by this cruel and unnecessary policy.

David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years, and a member of the MTA Board. The views in this column are solely those of the writer. The New Majority is available on CSS’s Web site: www.cssny.org.

The case for full funding is overwhelming. HAVP is simple, targeted, and proven in concept: like federal Section 8, vouchers cap a household’s rent burden at roughly 30 percent of income and can be used to prevent eviction or speed exits from shelter—precisely the interventions New York needs most. The program first launched last year; lawmakers who championed it now urge scaling to $250 million so it can reach far more households statewide. 

Consider the stakes. In 2025, more than eight percent of Bronx households were threatened with eviction filings. And this is not just a New York City story: in 27 counties outside the city, eviction filing rates in 2025 surpassed 2019 levels. These are not abstract metrics—they are warnings that thousands of families are one court date away from displacement and all the economic and educational harm that follows. 

Public support for an expansion is not merely broad—it’s overwhelming. A Community Service Society of New York policy brief released last month found 91 percent of respondents across regions, incomes, races, and political affiliations support expanding HAVP and making it permanent. 

Meanwhile, New York’s shelter system and statewide homelessness indicators remain under acute stress. New York City recorded roughly 90,000 people in its main shelter system on a typical night in May 2025. Statewide, HUD’s 2024 point-in-time data showed New York with 158,019 people experiencing homelessness, almost one in five of the national total—second only to California. Those figures reflect real families, real children, and real costs—moral and fiscal—when prevention fails. 

Full funding for HAVP is also fiscally smart. While rental assistance costs money, so do shelters, eviction courts, emergency rooms, and jails, all of which get used more when tenants can’t afford to stay in their homes. We should be comfortable budgeting for outcomes we want, like housing stability, especially when they save on the fiscal costs and human toll of eviction and homelessness. 

And the timing could not be more urgent. New York is staring down significant federal headwinds: proposed HUD cuts and policy changes would slash rental assistance and impose time limits, shifting costs to states and localities and putting tens of thousands of New York households at risk. Under the Trump Administration HUD’s discretionary budget is being shredded – by roughly 44–51 percent — compared to the prior year with severe consequences for Section 8, public housing and homelessness programs. New York cannot wish away Washington’s retrenchment; it must build state-level tools to keep families stably housed. HAVP is exactly that tool. 

Governor Hochul deserves credit for backing HAVP last year at $50 million, acknowledging the need for a state voucher. But the pilot was always a “foot in the door,” not the destination. The Assembly’s one-house budget now explicitly proposes an additional $200 million for HAVP—bringing the total to $250 million; the Senate echoes that commitment. 

Skeptics will ask: can we afford it? Look at the alternatives. Eviction spikes already stretch the courts; the state’s own dashboard shows filings rising across multiple counties since 2019. Each avoidable eviction ripples through school districts, Medicaid spending, and municipal budgets. Preventing the loss of a home is invariably preferable to repairing the damage. Another plus is that HAVP’s design—modeled on Section 8 but more flexible—helps close the affordability gap for those shut out of federal programs, including some immigrants and people with past convictions, and can be deployed quickly where need is greatest. 

There is also a pragmatic, statewide lens here. HAVP is not a “New York City program.” CSS research shows eviction pressure and homelessness extending well beyond the five boroughs, with several upstate counties exceeding city borough filing rates in 2025. Local leaders from Buffalo to the Capital Region need tools their communities can actually use; HAVP vouchers are portable, prevention-focused, and adaptable to local markets. 

Here’s the bottom line: HAVP is that rare example of common ground where tenant advocates, many landlords, nonprofit providers, and business leaders find alignment: stable homes reduce shelter costs, reduce turnover, and make neighborhoods safer and more resilient. That’s why we’ve seen sustained, multi-year advocacy to reach this point—and why both chambers have now put $250 million on the table. 

The Governor should join Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Speaker Carl Heastie and lock in the State Legislature’s full $250 million in the final FY27 state budget. Doing so will prevent evictions, reduce homelessness, and demonstrate that New York still knows how to solve big problems with practical, evidence-based policy—even when Washington turns away.

David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years.  The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer.  The Urban Agenda is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org.

The enactment last year of the “One Big Beautiful Bill (H.R.1) set in motion a series of health care cuts that would have left approximately 1.5 million New Yorkers without coverage over the next 2 years. In anticipation of a loss in federal funding, Governor Kathy Hochul included contingency funds in her executive budget in the event the federal government cut or reduced funding for public health insurance programs that cover lawfully present immigrants and citizen New Yorkers. But the Governor and State Legislature must act in the next few weeks to ensure that 480,000 New Yorkers do not lose coverage.  

A new Community Service Society of New York (CSS) report examines four steps that New York State lawmakers can take to mitigate the imminent loss of federal financing which affects citizens and legal immigrants enrolled in Medicaid, the Essential Plan (EP), and Qualified Health Plans (QHPs) on the NY State of Health Marketplace. With the state budget due on April 1, policymakers have fewer than three weeks to agree on a course of action for the 480,000 residents who are set to lose coverage starting July 1, 2026.  

Taking Advantage of New York’s Basic Health Plan Trust Fund 

Unlike other states, New York has an important policy lever – in the form of the Basic Health Plan Trust Fund – that can be used to continue to provide coverage for many lawfully present immigrants residing in the state. It currently has $8.9 billion that can only be used to pay for health insurance and could be used to fill coverage gaps created by H.R.1. Earlier this month, New York received approval to phase out its 1332 Waiver program and return to operating a 1331 BHP, preserving coverage for approximately 1.3 million out of the currently enrolled 1.7 million “Essential Plan (EP)” enrollees.  

Although H.R.1 reduced eligibility for federally funded health coverage from more than a dozen immigration statuses to just three (Medicaid, EP and QHPs), it did not terminate the eligibility for lawful immigrants to participate in a BHP.  

Under the 1331 BHP, the state will be able to continue to cover lawfully present immigrants with incomes between 0-200 percent of FPL and citizens and H.R.1 qualified immigrants with incomes above the Medicaid income eligibility levels (138 percent of FPL).  

For $2.5 billion, health coverage can be preserved for 480,000 New Yorkers 

In short, the CSS report analyzes the available options to address the 480,000 citizens and lawful immigrants with incomes between 138 and 250 percent of FPL who will no longer be eligible for free EP coverage after July 2026 and moderate-income lawful immigrants who will no longer qualify for subsidies after January 1, 2027. Report co-authors Elisabeth Benjamin and Mia Wagner describe in detail four interlocking proposals state lawmakers can adopt to ensure no coverage losses for this population. 

The four proposals are:  

1. The BHP proposal, including modeling the number of people who will be enrolled in BHP, how much it will cost, and the sustainability of the BHP trust fund (this proposal already has been initiated by Governor Hochul); 
2.   A proposal to provide EP coverage for the 444,000 EP 5 enrollees scheduled to lose coverage on July 1, 2026; 
3.   A proposal to ensure that a small group (6,000) of non-BHP eligible legal immigrants (the “Dreamers”) stay covered; 
4.  A proposal to provide state-funded premium assistance that replicates the federal premium assistance that 30,000 lawful immigrants are set to lose on January 1, 2027, under H.R.1. 

The four proposals are estimated to cost the state as little as $2.3 billion. This cost can be absorbed by the $3 billion the Hochul Administration already allocated in its proposed budget to pay for Medicaid for those who will be enrolled in the now-approved BHP.   

“For states like New York with large urban centers and diverse populations, H.R.1 represented a cruel and punitive attempt to eviscerate our public health landscape. It is contrary to our values as a state and as a pioneer in innovative health policies that serve all residents,” said David R. Jones, CSS President and CEO. “We call on Albany lawmakers to show the rest of the nation that New York values its immigrant communities and will always protect access to health care for its residents, despite efforts by Washington to strip it away.”  

“New York has a long tradition of filling in insurance coverage gaps created by the federal government,” said Elisabeth Ryden Benjamin, CSS Vice President of Health Initiatives and report co-author. “Thankfully, Governor Hochul’s proposed budget initially allocated contingency funding in the event the federal government did not approve the resumption of our state Basic Health Program. Now that that has occurred, we are hopeful that in the next three weeks, the Governor, the Majority Leader, and the Speaker can come together to redeploy that contingency funding to save health insurance for the 480,000 New Yorkers set to lose coverage beginning this July.”  

"It is essential to the stability of our state’s health care system to ensure these 480,000 New Yorkers continue to be insured,” said Mia Wagner, CSS Director of Health Policy and report co-author. “Without access to health insurance, patients are forced to choose between going to the doctor and paying their bills. The state must act to protect the physical and fiscal health of New York in this year’s budget.” 

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion a more equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. www.cssny.org 

Since 1843, the Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has promoted economic opportunity and well-being for low-income New Yorkers through research, policy advocacy, and direct services. We have been at the forefront of advocacy for better housing conditions since the beginning, from the city’s first tenement laws in the 1800's to contemporary organizing for strong tenants’ rights.

Our 2025 Annual Survey of Housing and Economic Security showed wide housing quality issues across the rental market. We found the greatest among low-income tenants and housing voucher-holders. Additionally, we know that there are specific landlords who have spent years deferring maintenance in their buildings, making conditions essentially unlivable for their tenants, without recourse.

New York City needs stronger tools to stabilize buildings in financial and physical distress, and to hold bad landlords accountable.

Dovetailing with broader tax lien sale reform, the SAFER Homes Act would create such a tool. It would improve the Third Party Transfer program’s targeting and increase outreach to building owners. The revamped program will focus on buildings in most severe physical and financial distress, while clearly communicating with owners and residents alike throughout the process.

In particular, SAFER Homes will offer an expanded pathway for tenants to create new co-ops, creating a pathway for new social housing creation.

CSS offers our full support to the SAFER Homes Act.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. If you have any questions, please contact me at omironova@cssny.org.

The proposed rule could upend the lives of millions of people nationwide and place a bullseye on thousands of New Yorkers in mixed-immigration status households. At risk is nothing short of casting into homelessness low-income citizens, legal residents and many children born on U.S soil.

The chaos could complicate Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s campaign pledge to invest heavily in repairs to the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) as part of his housing affordability strategy. He should also speak out against the looming Trump assault guaranteed to spike homelessness among New Yorkers who desperately depend on public housing.

The mayor, who has not said much publicly about NYCHA since taking office, has an obligation to articulate his plans for public housing as soon as possible. More than one million renters in New York State rely on vouchers to pay at least part of their rent. In New York City, 520,808 people live in HUD-assisted buildings, including public housing, project-based subsidies, and dwellings for the elderly and disabled persons.

Already, the long-neglected NYCHA was among thousands of agencies warned in recent weeks that they must verify the legal status of residents or face sanctions. In a test drive of the policy, which was proposed in the Heritage Foundation’s poisonous Project 2025 policy roadmap, San Francisco’s housing authority has already begun checks after it was given a 30-day deadline.

Things will get ugly fast if families, through no fault of their own, are evicted from NYCHA apartments costing on average $548 a month. In the face of New York City’s affordable housing emergency, where will they go? Forcing households into homelessness is a likely outcome – in fact, it may be the point – of this heartless policy.

Mamdani went to the White House recently to ask President Donald Trump behind closed doors for $21 billion to develop an old Queens rail yard into the city’s biggest affordable housing project in a half century. It would take years to complete and require an extraordinary political feat to make the enormous 12,000 housing units, parks, hospitals and other amenities reality.

Meanwhile, there is an imminent risk to NYCHA’s signature construction project, the creation of 2,500 market-rate units by demolishing the Fulton and Chelsea-Elliot Houses. A state appeals court judge last month temporarily halted construction after a group of tenants successfully appealed to stop the project, which calls for roughly 3,500 mixed-income apartments – including about 1,000 permanently affordable units – stores and other amenities.

Mamdani built his campaign around his promise to freeze rent in rent-stabilized apartments, which the candidate’s constellation of friends and allies repeated far and wide to successfully appeal to young voters. He’s moving to fulfill the pledge. The rent-freeze illustrates the way Mamdani reads the room, getting everyone on board with an issue that magnifies his charisma and youthful energy.

His more muted campaign website promised to “double” the city’s capital investment in major renovations of NYCHA housing and build new, affordable publicly controlled housing on NYCHA’s city-owned land. As well as use his political capital to increase city subsidies to housing repairs and push Albany to support his commitment to NYCHA’s capital needs on an annual basis.

The new mayor’s first preliminary five-year capital plan included $662 million in FY 2027 for upkeep of 3,200 NYCHA units and $30 million for heat pumps in the Rockaways. That’s a good start as he is poised to propose his first budget. He has promised to pay for his ambitious agenda with higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy, municipal bonds and other steps, most of which must be approved by Albany. There are signs Mamdani’s impassioned followers are pressuring Gov. Kathy Hochul and state lawmakers to support taxing the richest New Yorkers to pay for the mayor’s stated goal of leveling the economic playing field.

Mamdani’s stance on public housing should be informed by the cautionary tale of former Mayor Eric Adams’ trail of broken campaign promises. His political base experienced vertigo as he abandoned his north star pledges, tipping his political support off its axis with double-speak about NYCHA, police brutality and his public embrace of Trump.

Here’s the lesson: The challenges at NYCHA won’t magically disappear, even if we don’t mention them aloud. City Hall must take the lead in rallying the state legislature, builders, investors, banks and advocates for the poor to solve the problem of housing affordability. We all have skin in the game, whether we want to or not.

But the mayor should remind everyone involved that NYCHA is the linchpin in any solution to New York City’s affordable housing crisis.

David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years. The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer. The Urban Agenda is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org.

The enactment of H.R. 1 will result in draconian changes to eligibility and funding for health insurance, causing an estimated 1.7 million New Yorkers to lose their coverage. HCFANY urges the State to use the FY27 budget to mitigate the harm of H.R. 1 and keep as many New Yorkers enrolled in health coverage as possible.

Fortunately, New York State has several revenue sources that can help mitigate the worstcase scenarios triggered by H.R. 1. These sources should be committed to a “coverage lock box” to protect New Yorkers losing coverage.

First, the Executive Budget has conservatively assumed that the State will need to provide State-only funded Medicaid to the Aliessa population, or to State residents with lawfully present immigration status. Assuming the State successfully returns to operating its Essential Plan (EP) program under the federal Basic Health Program (BHP) authority, this would free up approximately $3.9 billion. Second, the State has recently been awarded a delay in the Managed Care Organization (MCO) tax, which will generate another $1 billion in revenue. Together, this $4.9 billion in found resources should be set aside in New York’s “coverage lock box” to fund quality, affordable health coverage for those targeted to lose it.

To this end, HCFANY has the following three categories of recommendations to offer to the State Legislature: (I) protect and improve health coverage; (II) regulate prices to create a more affordable health care system for New Yorkers; and (III) robustly fund consumer assistance and enrollment programs and increase Article 6 funding to help New Yorkers navigate new complex hurdles.

Our detailed comments are offered below.

I. Protect and improve health insurance coverage.

HCFANY urges the Legislature to ensure the final budget protects and improves New Yorkers' access to health insurance coverage. The Executive Budget could be improved to mitigate coverage losses resulting from H.R. 1. It also includes several components to improve health insurance coverage, as described below.

HCFANY has recommendations in the following areas: (1) stemming insurance coverage losses for citizens and lawful immigrants; (2) proposals related to Managed Care; (3) amendments to the emergency medical services and Surprise Bills law; (4) reforms to Prior Authorization; and (5) enacting the New York Health Act.

Specifically, among reforms to Prior Authorization (4), the Executive Budget proposes to expand the Consumer Guide, which is issued annually. HCFANY noted in its 2025-26 rate review comments that this “Consumer Guide” excludes 80 percent of the individual market. The legislature should ensure that all plans are included in the Guide along with the proposed further expansions.

1. Stem insurance coverage losses for citizens and lawful immigrants as a result of H.R. 1 (not included in FY27 Executive Budget).

The enactment of H.R. 1 will cause significant disruptions to federal funding for lawful immigrant enrollment, including substantial eligibility cuts, prompting New York to phase out its 1332 Waiver program and revert to operating a 1331 BHP.^[1]

The FY27 Executive Budget was developed under the prudent assumption that the State’s request to roll back the 1332 waiver and return to the Section 1331 BHP will be denied by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). As a result, the FY27 Executive Budget allocates $3.89 million in new Medicaid spending to cover lawful immigrants currently enrolled in the EP who are newly ineligible for federal financial participation.^[2[ In 2001, in Aliessa v. Novello, the New York State Court of Appeals ruled that the State must provide coverage, as part of its duty to care for the needy, to low-income immigrants who are otherwise Permanently Residing Under Color of Law (PRUCOL). As a result of the Aliessa case, the State must make up cuts to federal funding for lawful immigrants who are newly ineligible, hence the FY27 budget allocation.

While a return to BHP will allow 609,000 lawfully present immigrants to retain EP coverage, H.R. 1 will still eliminate coverage for approximately 480,000 New Yorkers, including: (1) 444,000 EP enrollees (citizens and immigrants) with incomes between 200-250 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL); (2) 6,000 individuals with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA) immigration status or residual PRUCOLs; and 30,000 lawfully present immigrants with incomes over 200 percent of the FPL.

Assuming New York’s return to a BHP is approved, there are three options that the State can take to provide coverage for these three groups:

• Offer State-only funded EP coverage to the 444,000 New Yorkers expected to lose EP eligibility in July 2026. Six-month coverage with no premium would cost between $960 million and $1.7 billion, depending on the premium rate level set. If a modest $50 premium is levied, this option would cost between $710 and $943 million per year, depending on the premium rate level set.
• Offer State-only funded EP to the 6,000 DACA and other residual PRUCOL immigrants with incomes between 138-200 percent of the FPL. This would cost the State between $29 and $50 million per year, depending on the level of the EP premium rates.
• Create a State-only funded premium assistance program to make Qualified Health Plans (QHPs) equally affordable for 30,000 lawfully present immigrants, like the State does for their citizen counterparts. This would cost $244 million per year, beginning in 2027.

2. Proposals related to Managed Care (HMH Article VII, Part M).

The FY27 Executive Budget includes several changes related to managed care, including: the repeal of continuous coverage for children, amendments to the EP benefit package, and termination of presumptive eligibility for immigrants and children. HCFANY makes the following recommendations regarding these provisions:

Delay the repeal of continuous coverage for children up to age six. The FY27 Executive Budget repeals the State’s continuous coverage program for children up to age six, effective July 1, 2026.^[3] Currently, continuous coverage for children is authorized under the State’s Medicaid 1115 Waiver, which expires on March 31, 2027.^[4] New federal rules indicate that the federal government will not reauthorize children’s continuous coverage – used by a dozen states – as their Waivers expire. The Legislature should delay the repeal to the last possible moment, or at the very least until January 1, 2027, to ensure a smooth transition for these children.

Amend the Essential Plan benefit package. The FY27 Executive Budget amends the definition of health care services to be provided by a BHP in Section 369-gg(c) of the Social Services Law.^[5] Specifically, it requires the Commissioner of Health to set the benefits to include Essential Health Benefits, effectively adding vision, dental, and access to all cancer care centers in the area. This section of the HMH Article VII bill removes long-term services and supports from the definition of health care services to be provided by a BHP, thereby extending the period during which the BHP trust fund can be used to provide coverage and offset federal cuts. HCFANY supports all these changes to the Essential Plan benefit package.

Terminate presumptive eligibility for immigrants and children. The FY27 Executive Budget eliminates presumptive eligibility for pregnant women and children.^[6] Since the New York State of Health Marketplace was launched, this process is no longer used by consumers. Accordingly, HCFANY does not oppose its repeal.

3. Amendments to the Emergency Medical Services and Surprise Bills law (PPGG Article VII, Part T).

The Executive Budget seeks to strip consumer protection for Medicaid beneficiaries under New York’s landmark surprise billing legislation. HCFANY urges the Legislature to reject any effort to treat Medicaid beneficiaries less advantageously than other New Yorkers.

HCFANY has no objection to extending the Surprise Bills law to Empire Plan enrollees or to cap the amount of fees awarded under the Independent Dispute Resolution process.

4. Reforms to Prior Authorization (TED Article VII, Part HH).

The FY27 Executive Budget includes a series of reforms to prior authorization, continuity of care, formulary disclosures, and the annually issued consumer guide. Recent national polling found that people with insurance ranked prior authorization requirements as their largest health care burden, aside from cost.^[7]

Consumer Guide. The FY27 Executive Budget requires that the Department of Financial Services (DFS) include several additional data points on grievances, approvals, appeals, and adverse determinations.^[8] HCFANY supports expanding the Consumer Guide.

Unfortunately, these laudable improvements to the Consumer Guide are a meaningless expenditure of State funds unless the Legislature requires the Guide to include all products. As of 2025, 80 percent of New Yorkers enrolled in the individual market are enrolled in plans that are omitted. The Consumer Guide should report on the plans to which its purported consumer audience is enrolled. The Legislature should expand on the FY27 Executive Budget additions to the Consumer Guide and require DFS to partner with the Department of Health (DOH) to ensure that the Consumer Guide serves all consumers. See Figure 1.

Continuity of care. The FY27 Executive Budget expands the period insurers must cover out-of-network treatment for new enrollees (“continuity of care”) to 90 days for all health conditions. For pregnant enrollees, this includes care throughout pregnancy and postpartum.^[9] HCFANY supports this proposal to expand continuity of care.

Preauthorization. The FY27 Executive Budget requires that prior authorizations for designated chronic conditions remain valid for at least 1 year. However, HCFANY recommends the Legislature go further and requires carriers to accept simple provider attestations for enrollees who have permanent chronic conditions that do not change over time, instead of a full annual utilization review.

Formulary disclosure. The FY27 Executive Budget requires formularies to be posted publicly in a standard, accessible format. Specifically, a formulary drug list is considered accessible if it can be viewed on an insurer’s public website without creating an account and if a patient can easily determine which formulary applies to each plan. HCFANY supports this proposal to expand access to information on health plans’ formulary drug lists.^[10]

5. Enact the New York Health Act (not included in FY27 Executive Budget).

Of course, many of the changes above would be unnecessary if the State enacted the New York Health Act, which would provide affordable, comprehensive coverage for all New Yorkers, regardless of income or immigration status. HCFANY recommends that the Legislature enact the New York Health Act to address the long-term health care needs of New Yorkers.

II. Regulate prices to create a more affordable health care system for New Yorkers.

HCFANY commends the Legislature and the Governor for taking action to lessen the impact of medical debt on New Yorkers over the past few years. Unfortunately, health care costs remain unaffordable for many New Yorkers, a problem that will worsen significantly under H.R. 1. Given that 75 percent of people with medical debt owe at least some of it to hospitals, HCFANY urges the Legislature to consider the following consumer protections.

Health care spending has increased rapidly over the past several decades in New York and nationwide. Between 2000 and 2020, health care costs rose approximately twice as fast as inflation.

It is well established that prices, rather than patient care utilization or the complexity of services used, drive rising health care spending.^[11] Specifically, rising hospital prices have had the greatest impact, with hospital spending accounting for more than one-third of New York's health care expenditures.^[12] Importantly, higher hospital prices are not necessarily associated with higher-quality care and may even be linked to lower hospital performance and patient experience scores.^[13]

It is critical that the Legislature take action to control prices in the long-term in conjunction with short-term solutions to mitigate the harm of H.R. 1. HCFANY recommends that the State take several modest options, including adopting site-neutral payment policies for lowcomplexity services, requiring increased investment in primary care, and creating an Office of Health Care Affordability.

1. Adopt the Fair Pricing Act (site-neutral payment policies) for certain lowcomplexity services (not included in FY27 Executive Budget).

The Legislature should require plans to reimburse no more than 150 percent of the Medicare rate for a list of low-complexity procedures recommended by MedPAC. Adopting this price cap, along the lines of what is suggested in the Fair Pricing Act (S705A|A2140), would reduce cost disparities between hospitals and non-hospital providers.

Brown University researchers estimate that if the Fair Pricing Act were adopted statewide, it could save the State $1.14 billion annually, including $213 million in reduced outof-pocket costs for consumers with commercial insurance.^[14]

2. Invest in primary care to improve outcomes and promote health equity (not included in FY27 Executive Budget).

HCFANY urges the Legislature to include the provisions of the Primary Care Investment Act (S1634|A1915A) which would require: (1) the State to measure and publicize the current level of primary care spending and (2) require insurers that report spending less than 12.5 percent of their overall health spending on primary care to increase that investment by one percent each year until they reach at least 12.5 percent.

Nationally, only an estimated 4.6 percent of health care spending is on primary care. New York spends less than the national average: 4.2 percent of health care spending is on primary care for Employer Sponsored Insurance and 2.7 percent for Medicare FFS plans.^[15] However, primary care accounts for approximately 48 percent of office visits each year.^[16] At least 17 other states have enacted laws or promulgated regulations to remedy this underinvestment in primary care.^[17]

The New York State of Health’s (NYSOH) Provider Access and Availability Survey Results, published in May 2025, found significant problems with patient access to primary care. For example, the primary care provider directory access rate was 26 percent for QHPs and 28 percent for EP networks. In addition, the timely appointment rates for sick visits were only 32 percent and 17 percent for QHP and EP networks, respectively.^[18]

HCFANY urges the Legislature to include the provisions in the Primary Care Investment Act (S1634|A1915A) in the final budget to reduce health care costs, improve patient outcomes, and promote health equity.

3. Establish an independent New York Office of Health Care Affordability to slow health care spending growth, promote high-value care, and assess market consolidation (not included in FY27 Executive Budget).

New York has demonstrated a need for increased regulation of its health care spending growth, quality, and market consolidation. Fortunately, other states offer models for structural solutions to address these issues, such as California’s Office of Health Care Affordability (OHCA). Following California's lead, New York should require its members not to receive compensation from health care entities. New York’s Public Health and Health Planning Council (PHHPC) is comprised of political appointees who are mostly affiliated with hospitals and other health care industry representatives. Other states, including Vermont, Indiana, and Maryland, have similar affordability boards that are increasing oversight of health care costs through price caps, transparency rules, and budget reviews.^[19]

The Legislature should consider creating an independent New York Office of Health Care Affordability to address long-term structural issues to improve health care delivery in New York.

4. Strengthen oversight of health care transactions (HMH Article VII, Part H).

HCFANY supports the series of proposals in the FY 27 Executive Budget to expand oversight of health care transactions, with minor amendments to improve transparency and further strengthen oversight.^[20]

Tracking the impact of material transactions on costs, quality, access, health equity, and competition. The FY27 Executive Budget requires annual reporting to the DOH for the five years following a material transaction. These reports must include metrics that allow the DOH to assess the transaction's impact on costs, quality, access, health equity, and competition.^[21] Research supports that consolidation leads to higher prices, worsening the health care affordability crisis.^[22] HCFANY strongly supports the initiative to track the impact of material transactions on the broader health care system, as is outlined in the FY27 Executive Budget. However, the Legislature should consider requiring the DOH to publicly post an annual summary of its findings, allowing consumers and advocates to understand the impact of health care transactions on costs, quality, access, health equity, and competition. In addition to lacking a public summary, this annual reporting does not include a penalty for material transactions that are detrimental to cost, quality, access, health equity, and/or competition. To address this, the Legislature may consider granting conditional approval to transactions during this tracking period, which only becomes finalized after being monitored for five years without incident.

Expanding the statements required for written notices of health care transactions. The FY27 Executive Budget requires two new statements to be included in the written notice that health care entities must submit to the DOH. These statements require disclosure of whether any party to the transaction has closed operations, is in the process of closing operations, or has substantially reduced services in the past three years.^[23] Another statement requires disclosure of whether real estate-related payments, including sale-leaseback agreements, are part of the proposed transaction.^[24] HCFANY supports both of these additions.

Utilizing a Cost and Market Impact Review (CMIR) to assess transactions. The FY27 Executive Budget includes language allowing the DOH, at its discretion, to review proposed material transactions with a CMIR.^[25] HCFANY supports the utilization of CMIR; however, the Legislature should consider expanding this language to require public posting of related documents, such as notices and preliminary and final reports. This change mirrors transparency requirements in other states: Connecticut’s Office of Health Strategy publicly posts documentation of material change notices (MCN) requiring CMIR and OCHA posts a complete list of MCNs on its website.^[26] Relatedly, the FY27 Executive Budget authorizes the DOH to postpone a transaction closing by up to 180 days after its preliminary review to conduct a CMIR.^[27] HCFANY supports this provision.

Currently, transactions that undergo the DOH's Certificate of Need (CON) process do not count as “material” and would not be subject to the changes outlined in Part H.^[28] HCFANY urges the Legislature to change this precedent so that transactions related to sites such as hospitals and nursing homes are also reviewed and, if appropriate, subject to CMIR. For example, in Connecticut, review for CMIR is woven into the CON application process.^[29] In California, OCHA’s first transaction review requiring CMIR involved a skilled nursing facility.^[30]

The Legislature should expand the language in the FY27 Executive Budget to ensure that the same affordability criteria outlined in Part H also apply to transactions requiring CON applications.

III. Funding Navigators, Consumer Assistance Programs, and Increasing Article 6 Funding.

HCFANY urges the Legislature to support consumer assistance programs by increasing funding for Navigators and Community Health Advocates. The devastating cuts to federal health programs make investing in Navigators and Consumer Assistance Programs more important than ever.

Increasing Funding for Health Insurance Enrollment Navigators.

The Navigator program has been instrumental in ensuring New Yorkers enroll, keep, and use their health insurance. Navigators provide unbiased, personalized assistance year-round in more than 40 languages.^[31] The Navigator program is predominantly run through trusted local community-based organizations (CBOs) that provide culturally and linguistically competent services.^[32] Roughly 70 percent of Marketplace enrollees utilize in-person assistance, and over 400,000 people currently enrolled in coverage use NYSOH Navigators.

HCFANY is grateful that the Governor’s budget includes $28.3 million for Navigators in FY27. Given the uncertainty surrounding the future of federal health care programs, HCFANY urges the Legislature to increase funding for the Navigator program. The 2023-24 budget included a $300,000 one-year cost-of-living increase. But the Navigator program has received only a single-year cost-of-living adjustment since 2013. Under this essentially flat funding scenario, the Navigator programs have had to lose staff to keep up with inflation. It is more important than ever to build infrastructure in the Navigator program. The Legislature should increase Navigator funding to $38 million to reflect over ten years without appropriate cost-ofliving increases.

In addition, the Legislature should consider adopting a proven strategy of funding CBOs to conduct outreach in difficult-to-reach communities to maintain insurance enrollment in the face of federal policy changes. In 2023-2024, a group of philanthropies joined together to fund The Keep New York Covered program, which provided dedicated outreach funding to Statecertified enrollment groups to get the word out about new federal policies requiring consumers to recertify their coverage. At a cost of just $30 per enrollment, 36 community-based assisters were able to generate a 3,850 percent return on investment, enrolling 85,132 New Yorkers into coverage by conducting 63 million outreach engagements through social media, in-person presentations, mailings, and the like.^[33]

HCFANY urges the Legislature to fund the Navigator program at $38 million to guarantee continued high-quality enrollment services. New York should also allocate $5 million in grants to CBOs to conduct outreach in underserved communities.

Maintain funding for Community Health Advocates (CHA).

The CHA program helps people with health insurance access in-network care, resolve billing issues, avoid medical debt, appeal coverage denials, and address other barriers to obtaining affordable medical care. Since 2010, CHA has assisted more than 564,000 New York clients through a diverse network of CBOs serving each of the 62 counties in New York State. Altogether, the CHA network has helped consumers save nearly $252 million in health care costs. In FY24-25, CHA saved consumers $25 million, yielding a 407% return on investment.

CHA assists consumers through a toll-free helpline and a network of 24 CBOs and small business serving groups, operating in all New York counties. CHA’s helpline number is listed on commercial health insurance “Explanations of Benefits” and claim denial notices; Medicaid Managed Care denial notices (as of 2022); and the NYS Hospital Financial Assistance uniform application (as of 2024). As a result, call volume has surged by 172 percent.

Last year, the Governor and Legislature made a critical investment in CHA by increasing funding from $5 million to $7.2 million. This investment strengthened CHA’s capacity at a pivotal moment, as New York struggles to mitigate the damage caused by federal cuts under H.R. 1, which will cause an estimated 1.7 million New Yorkers to lose their health coverage. H.R. 1 eliminates federal funding and eligibility for coverage for hundreds of thousands of lawfully present immigrant New Yorkers, as well as imposes new administrative burdens for millions of others to retain their coverage. In addition, many more will no longer be able to afford coverage through the NYSOH Marketplace.

HCFANY is grateful that the Governor’s budget includes $5.5 million for CHA in FY26- 27 and urges the Legislature to allocate an additional $1.7 million to maintain CHA’s funding at $7.2 million.

Funding Community Health Access to Addiction and Mental Healthcare Project (CHAMP).

CHAMP provides specialized post-enrollment services for people seeking substance use disorder or mental health treatment. Its funding should be maintained at $3 million, as it is in the Executive Budget.

Increase Article 6 Funding in New York City.

HCFANY strongly supports increasing Article 6 funding for New York City and restoring parity in reimbursement rates and urges the Legislature to include this increase in their one-house budget proposals.

New York City is the only locality in the state that is reimbursed at a lower rate for core public health services under Article 6, receiving just 20 percent for spending above its base grant compared to 36 percent for all other local health departments.

This inequitable policy has cost the City up to $90 million each year and unfairly shifts the burden of funding essential public health programs onto local taxpayers. Article 6 supports critical services such as maternal and child health, communicable disease prevention, and chronic disease management — programs that are especially vital in a large, diverse city with significant health needs. At a time of growing public health challenges and federal funding cuts, the state should correct this inequity by increasing Article 6 funding for New York City.

Thank you again for providing this opportunity to submit testimony and for your consideration of our comments. We stand ready to work with the Legislature to advance our recommendations. Please contact Mia Wagner (mwagner@cssny.org) with any questions.

Notes

1. Draft Submission to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS): New York State’s Request to Terminate the Section 1332 State Innovation Waiver and Return to the Basic Health Program. 2025.

2. Financial Plan, NYS FY27 Executive Budget. Page 17.

3. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part M, Sections 13, 14, and 15.

4. 1115 Waiver, New York Medicaid Redesign Team.

5. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part M, Section 3.

6. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part M, Section 13.

7. Kirzinger, Ashley et al. “KFF Health Tracking Poll: Prior Authorizations Rank as Public’s Biggest Burden When Getting Health Care.” KFF, February 2026.

8. FY27 Executive Budget, TED Article VII, Part HH, Subpart A.

9. FY27 Executive Budget, TED Article VII, Part HH, Subpart B.

10. FY27 Executive Budget, TED Article VII, Part HH, Subpart C.

11. Sisko, A. et al. (2019), National Health Expenditure Projections, 2018–27: Economic And Demographic Trends Drive Spending And Enrollment Growth, Health Affairs.

12. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (n.d.). Health Expenditures by State of Residence: Summary Tables. (supra, n.1.).

13. Jamalabadi, S., Winter, V., & Schreyögg, J. (2020). A Systematic Review of the Association Between Hospital Cost/Price and the Quality of Care. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 18(5), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-020-00577-6.; Beauvais, B., Gilson, G., Schwab, S., Jaccaud, B., Pearce, T., & Holmes, T. (2020). Overpriced? Are Hospital Prices Associated with the Quality of Care? Healthcare (Basel), 8(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8020135.

14. Murray, Roslyn et al. “Estimating Savings from the Fair Pricing Act and Commercial Site-Neutral Payments in New York State.” Center for Advancing Health Policy Through Research, Brown University School of Public Health. February 2025.

15. Health Care Cost Institute. September 2025. https://healthcostinstitute.org/all-hcci-reports/4-of-health-spendinggoes-to-primary-care/.

16. “Investing in Primary Care: A State-Level Analysis,” Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative, July 2019, 8

17. “Primary Care Legislative Trends 2023,” Primary Care Development Corporation, January 2024.

18. Provider Access and Availability Survey Results, New York State of Health. May 2025.

19. Healthcare Affordability Snapshot, Healthcare Value Hub.

20. Empowering New York Consumers in an Era of Hospital Consolidation. May 2018.

21. FY27 Executive Budget, Part H, Section 3 (b).

23. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part H, Section 1 (g).

24. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part H, Section 1 (h).

25. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part H, Section 4 (a).

26. California Department of Healthcare Access and Information, “OHCA Background & Resources” https://hcai.ca.gov/affordability/ohca/ohca-background-resources/. California Department of Healthcare Access and Information “Material Change Transaction Notices (MCN) and Cost and Market Impact Review (CMIR)” https://hcai.ca.gov/affordability/ohca/assess-market-consolidation/material-change-transaction-notices-mcn-andcost-and-market-impact-review-cmir/. CT Office of Health Strategy, “Cost and Market Impact Review” https://portal.ct.gov/ohs/health-systems-planning/cost-and-market-impact-review/cost-and-market-impactreview?language=en_US.

27. FY27 Executive Budget, HMH Article VII, Part H, Section 4 (b).

28. New York State DOH, “Public Health Law Article 45-A, Material Transactions Frequently Asked Questions”.

29. CT Office of Health Strategy, “General Process for Cost and Market Impact Review”.

30. California Department of Healthcare Access and Information, “Covenant Care California, Inc. Cost and Market Impact Review”.

31. New York State of Health Marketplace, “Assistors Page”.

32. K. Pollitz, et. al, “Consumer Assistance in health Insurance: Evidence of Impact and Unmet Need,” KFF. August 2020.

33. M. Wagner, M. Flynn, E. Benjamin, S. Kunkel, “We’ll Keep You Covered: How Funding Community-Based Outreach Reduces Coverage Losses in the Face of Federal Policy Changes,” August 2025.

Across the country, and acutely in Democratic-led states like New York, ICE and Border Patrol officers have been routinely stopping, questioning, and detaining U.S. citizens and lawfully present residents. These are not isolated mistakes but part of a pattern of unconstitutional policing rooted in racial profiling, intimidation, and unchecked power. And now, the consequences have turned fatal.

We all know what happened last month: Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti were killed by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis in separate incidents that can also be described as a gross federal misconduct. When ICE violates court orders nearly 100 times in a single month, as a federal judge reported, and carries out militarized raids that terrorize residents, states must respond.

Last Friday, Governor Kathy Hochul introduced legislation that would bar ICE from co-opting state and local law enforcement in civil immigration enforcement. Her action follows new measures in her State of the State address to protect New Yorkers’ constitutional rights and hold federal agents accountable. When federal agents abuse their authority, trample constitutional rights, and act aggressively, they erode trust between communities and all law enforcement.

That is why the New York for All Act matters so profoundly.

The act (S2235A/A3506) would prohibit state and local agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement in ways that enable abuses—such as sharing personal data, assisting in warrantless detentions, or participating in operations that target people based on race, language, or perceived immigration status. At its core, the New York for All Act reinforces a simple truth: public safety does not come from violating people’s rights.

By advancing the New York for All Act, Majority Leader Stewart-Cousins is asserting that New Yorkers will not be conscripted into the federal government’s civil rights violations. She is also upholding a long-standing New York value: the belief that our diversity is a point of pride, not suspicion. The bill ensures that residents can access schools, hospitals, courts, and public services without fear of being profiled, detained, or funneled into a deportation pipeline.

But protecting immigrant communities also means ensuring access to justice. As ICE arrests rise and immigration court backlogs grow, New York must also invest in legal services and guarantee the right to counsel by passing the Access to Representation Act (A270/S141) and the BUILD Act (A2689/S4538). Legal representation dramatically improves a person’s chances of obtaining a favorable outcome in immigration court. Without an attorney, families are far more likely to be separated, By guaranteeing counsel to those who cannot afford it and strengthening the legal services system for the long term, New York can help immigrant New Yorkers remain in their communities and contribute to the state’s future.

In this moment—when masked federal officers stop people without warrants, profiling them because they speak Spanish or look “foreign”—New York must send a resounding message: this is not who we are, and we will not be complicit.

The New York for All Act, Access to Representation Act, and BUILD Act are not just good policy; they represent moral leadership. And it is exactly what this moment demands.

A recent lawsuit by the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), the NAACP New York State Conference, and The Bronx Defenders lays out the case starkly: NYPD vehicle searches have surged, overwhelmingly target drivers of color, and rarely turn up guns. The complaint calls it what millions of New Yorkers will recognize from lived experience –“stop-and-frisk on wheels.” 

The numbers are eye-opening. NYPD conducted 28,416 vehicle searches in 2024, an 83 percent increase from 2023; more than 84 percent of all searches from 2022 through September 2025 were of Black or Latino drivers, while white motorists accounted for less than four percent. Search rates are higher across all 78 precincts for Black and Latino drivers. Critically, these searches “almost never” recover a weapon according to the lawsuit.

Those car stops sit atop a broader resurgence of pedestrian stops. The court-appointed monitor in Floyd v. City of New York has repeatedly found persistent racial disparities and a troubling share of stops and frisks that lack constitutional footing. In April 2024, the monitor documented disparities across commands and post-stop outcomes; later reports highlighted under-reporting of stops and elevated rates of unlawful frisks and searches—particularly by specialized gun-suppression units. 

If this all sounds familiar, it is. The monitor’s special reviews of Neighborhood Safety Teams (NSTs)—units championed to take guns off the street—found about a quarter of their stops unlawful and 97 percent of the people they stopped to be Black or Latino. In a sample of 230 car stops, NSTs recovered a weapon twice. Those findings are not outliers; subsequent monitor snapshots and civil-rights groups’ summaries have underscored rising unconstitutional stops and chronic under-reporting citywide. 

And what’s the NYPD’s justification for a policy that routinely violates the constitutional rights of Black and Latino motorists? They claim they go where the crime is. But a volume defense is not a constitutional defense. The Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments do not relax in zip codes with higher 911 call volumes. And there’s something else. This is not about random vehicle stops, according to Donna Lieberman, longtime executive director of the NYCLU. Rather, it’s about what happens to people after they are stopped. 

“Police officers are not supposed to search the cars people are in unless they have suspicion that they are doing some harm, violence or using a weapon,” Lieberman said. “And when you don’t turn up a weapon in virtually any of the cases, it ceases to be a tool to get guns off the street. So, it’s not about crime, getting guns off the street or reducing violence. It’s about racial profiling.”

Former Mayor Eric Adams tolerated this revival of aggressive tactics as the necessary price of driving down shootings. But independent watchdogs have not found strong evidence that the spike in stops is what’s moving safety metrics; they have found substantial evidence of illegality and disparity.  For example, ProPublica’s coverage of the federal monitor’s 2025 report on the NYPD’s Community Response Team labeled the conduct “troubling” and “unconstitutional.” The NYCLU has likewise shown that as pedestrian stops fell dramatically after Floyd, violent crime didn’t spike, undercutting the core claim that mass stopping is essential to safety. 

Meanwhile, police accountability is a myth. In September 2024, a court-ordered 500-page disciplinary review concluded officers who engage in unconstitutional stops and frisks “rarely, if ever” face discipline—even when the Civilian Complaint Review Board substantiates misconduct. 

Data-driven gun violence prevention doesn’t look like this. If your anti-gun strategy requires blanket traffic enforcement in minority neighborhoods, produces massive racial disparities and almost no firearm recoveries from those vehicle searches, it’s not a strategy—it’s a tax on dignity and equal protection. Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch is the architect of the use of data collection in police practices and policies at the NYPD. We can only hope that the Commissioner is as concerned by the allegations in this lawsuit as we are and makes changes.  

A press release on the commissioner’s ‘State of the Department’ address last week announced that police officers will undergo updated “in-service training” covering a range of topics including constitutional policing. That’s good. Maybe we should take a look at the training to make sure officers have the same understanding of what is constitutional as we do. 

Finally, Mayor Mamdani must hold the NYPD accountable. He knows that when bad actors in the NYPD get away with abusive behavior and misconduct, it is not good for lion share of police officers who act with integrity, professionalism and a genuine commitment to public safety. More importantly, it hurts the community’s faith in policing. 

Gun violence is real and it demands effective action. But turning Black and brown motorists into suspects first and citizens second is neither effective nor lawful. The question now is not whether the mayor can rein in racial profiling and make accountability real; it’s whether he will.

David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years. The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer. The Urban Agenda is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org.

Across the country, and acutely in Democratic-led states like New York, ICE and Border Patrol officers have been routinely stopping, questioning, and detaining U.S. citizens and lawfully present residents. These are not isolated mistakes but part of a pattern of unconstitutional policing rooted in racial profiling, intimidation, and unchecked power. And now, the consequences have turned fatal.

We all know what happened last month: Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti were killed by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis, in separate incidents less than three weeks apart. According to multiple reports, Good was shot four times, including in the head, on January 7, 2026, after ICE officers approached her car; bystander video contradicts federal claims that she weaponized her vehicle. Her death has been officially ruled a homicide.

Then, on January 24, Pretti, an ICU nurse, was shot multiple times during what federal officials claimed was an armed confrontation. However, video verified by The New York Times and described in contemporaneous reporting shows Pretti standing among protesters with both hands visible—holding only a phone—before agents peppersprayed the crowd, tackled him to the ground, and opened fire. These killings were so egregious that federal prosecutors in Minnesota have threatened mass resignation over what they describe as illegal ICE operations and a Justice Department smear campaign designed to justify the deaths.

This is not simply federal overreach—this is federal misconduct. When ICE violates court orders nearly 100 times in a single month, as a federal judge reported, and carries out “militarized raids” that terrorize residents, the states must respond.

Last Friday, Governor Kathy Hochul introduced legislation that would effectively bar ICE from co-opting state and local law enforcement in civil immigration enforcement. The governor’s action – which follows new measures she unveiled in her annual `State of the State’ address to protect the constitutional rights of New Yorkers from federal overreach and hold federal agents accountable for unconstitutional action — is significant because across the nation, ICE agents are using rough-handed search and seizure methods on citizens. And here’s the point: when federal agents abuse their authority, act aggressively and trample constitutional rights it erodes trust between communities and all law enforcement.

That is why the New York for All Act matters so profoundly.

The act (S2235A/A3506) would prohibit state and local agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement in ways that enable abuses—such as turning over personal data, assisting in warrantless detentions, or participating in ICE operations that target people based on race, language, or perceived immigration status. At its core, the New York
for All Act reinforces a simple truth: public safety does not come from violating people’s rights.

The bill also recognizes a reality that Minneapolis tragically illuminated: when federal officers operate with impunity, every resident—regardless of citizenship—is at risk. The killings of Good and Pretti were not just violations of immigration norms but of the most fundamental American principles: due process, equal protection, and government accountability.

Communities across the nation are not accepting these abuses. Anti-ICE demonstrations have erupted nationwide, including student walkouts and mass protests in New York City. New York, however, can do more than protest. It can legislate.

By advancing the New York for All Act, Majority Leader Stewart-Cousins is asserting that New Yorkers will not be conscripted into the federal government’s civil rights violations. She is also upholding a long-standing New York value: the belief that our diversity is a point of pride, not suspicion. The bill ensures that residents can access schools, hospitals, courts, and public services without fear of being profiled, detained, or funneled into a deportation pipeline simply because an ICE officer decided that their skin color or accent made them a “target.”

The killings of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti are now part of our national conscience. Their names belong in the same conversation as past victims of abusive government force. But they also serve as a warning: if states do not draw clear boundaries, federal agencies that violate their mission will keep pushing until tragedy becomes routine.

And in this moment—when masked federal officers are stopping people on streets and at workplaces without warrants, profiling them because they speak Spanish, work lowwage jobs, or simply look “foreign”—New York must send a resounding message: This is not who we are. And we will not be complicit.

The New York for All Act is not just good policy; it is moral leadership. And it is exactly what this moment demands.

Rising hospital prices are driving the state's healthcare affordability crisis, with hospital spending representing more than one third of all health care expenditures in New York. But a modest legislative reform before state policymakers can significantly improve health care affordability by curbing high health care prices for a limited set of routine outpatient services, benefiting patients, unions and employers.

 A new Community Service Society of New York (CSS) brief, How the Fair Pricing Act’s Site Neutral Policy Boosts Health Care Affordability by Ensuring Savings will be Passed Through to Patients and Payers, explains how the state's existing insurance regulatory infrastructure prevents insurance carriers from retaining savings achieved through the Fair Pricing Act (S705/Krueger -A2140/Jackson) and how these savings would be passed on to patients, employers, and other payers.

 Specifically, the legislation proposes to establish site neutral policies for a modest set of outpatient procedures—that are easily performed in doctor’s offices and hospital clinics.  The Act would cap prices at 150 percent of the Medicare reimbursement rate regardless of where they are performed. This would stem the phenomenon of hospital-affiliated providers and clinics from charging excessive rates for simple services simply because they performed in a hospital-affiliated setting.  Such services include annual physical exams, vaccines, drug infusions, mammograms, lab tests, diagnostic imaging and other minor procedures.  The Act targets site-specific payment differences which are a key driver of rising health care prices.

 A February 2025 report by Brown University’s School of Public Health found that the Fair Pricing Act would result in more than $1 billion in health care savings and directly reduce out-of-pocket costs for New York patients by $213 million a year.

 "The affordability of healthcare shouldn’t depend on the building it’s delivered in. All New Yorkers should be able to receive routine medical care in a doctor's office without paying exorbitant hospital prices,” said State Senator Liz Krueger, primary sponsor of S705. “The Fair Pricing Act will help remedy the illogical and unfair hospital pricing system we currently have. New Yorkers are feeling more strapped than ever, and this bill is the kind of common-sense financial relief that they are demanding from Albany."

 “Healthcare is a basic right, not a luxury. Too many families are forced to choose between care and financial stability because of inflated hospital costs. The Fair Pricing Act ensures that routine care is accessible and affordable for all New Yorkers,” said State Assemblymember Chantel Jackson, primary sponsor of A2140. “This legislation will ease the burden on everyday families and empower communities to prioritize health over debt. It holds hospitals accountable, promotes transparency, and sends a clear message: New Yorkers deserve fairness in the healthcare system. Together, we are building a system that values people over profits and puts families first.”

 “Albany lawmakers have an opportunity to regulate hospital prices and put the brakes on the rapid growth of health care spending by enacting the Fair Pricing Act,” said David R. Jones, CSS President and CEO. “They should do it because we know higher hospital prices are not associated with increased quality of care. It’s time for New York to join other states that have already implemented policies to address high hospital costs.”

 "We cannot let high hospital prices continue to threaten healthcare affordability for working class New Yorkers. Our members count on being able to go to their local doctor’s office to take their kid for a flu shot, get an MRI for a balky knee or an IV bag for dehydration and they shouldn’t have to pay inflated prices just because a big hospital took over that facility,” said Manny Pastreich, President of 32BJ SEIU. “This report shows that a Fair Pricing policy makes healthcare fairer for all New Yorkers. 32BJ SEIU is proud to work with partners in the Coalition for Affordable Hospitals fighting for regular New Yorkers to access and afford quality healthcare."

“Patients and payers face sharp increases in health care spending when routine care shifts from doctors’ offices to higher-priced hospital-affiliated settings,” said Alison Goldberg, CSS Health Policy Analyst and co-author of the CSS brief. “The Fair Pricing Act would curb these high prices and generate significant savings for New Yorkers, no matter where they receive care.”

"The Fair Pricing Act provides an opportunity for New York legislators to make health care more affordable for patients, regardless of whether they have health insurance," said Mia Wagner, CSS Director of Health Policy and co-author of the CSS brief. "State action to control health care prices is especially critical following devastating federal cuts to health care that will leave over a million New Yorkers uninsured."

The CSS brief was co-authored by CSS Health Policy Analyst Alison Goldberg, CSS Director of Health Policy Mia Wagner, and CSS Vice President of Health Initiatives Elisabeth Benjamin. 

###

 The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion an equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. By expanding access to health care, affordable housing, employment opportunities, debt assistance, and more, we make a tangible difference in the lives of millions. Join us at www.cssny.org. 

In this interview, Sherrie reflects on what drew her to CSS, how strategic fundraising can help advance economic justice, and the importance of listening as a leadership practice. She also shares her vision for deepening partnerships with donors and supporters, and how philanthropy can serve as a catalyst for meaningful, long-term impact across New York.
 

Q: Can you tell us a bit about your background, and what drew you to CSS and this role?

A: I’m an adopted New Yorker — I came here for graduate school and have lived and worked in the city for more than 20 years. New York has profoundly shaped my worldview and my belief in the power of community. Throughout my career, I’ve been motivated by the idea that philanthropy can create real opportunity when it’s aligned with people and communities’ best interests. That belief led me to fundraising work. CSS embodies those values: a deep commitment to New Yorkers and a unique path to create a positive impact at a critical moment. This role offers a chance to help strengthen the city’s future when it’s needed most.
 

Q: What excites you most about joining CSS as the VP of Development?

A: This is an urgent time for New York with real potential to scale impact across the city and state in meaningful, tangible ways. Strategic philanthropy can play a catalytic role in expanding access and economic security across communities. I’m excited to bring my experience in donor engagement, securing transformational gifts, and building strong fundraising teams to help CSS grow its capacity and deepen its long-term impact for all New Yorkers.
 

Q: What motivates you personally to work toward economic justice?

A: I’ve seen firsthand how timely support can change the trajectory of a person’s life. What motivates me is helping connect resources to people who haven’t always had access. At its best, philanthropy supports individuals and families as they work toward stability, dignity, and self-determination. CSS’s mission aligns closely with that belief, ensuring New Yorkers have the tools and support they need to succeed and thrive.
 

Q: What opportunities do you see to deepen relationships with donors and supporters at CSS? 

A: With more than 180 years of service to New York, CSS is uniquely positioned to invite donors into a shared vision for the city’s future. There’s tremendous potential to engage supporters not just as funders, but as partners and collaborators in expanding opportunity for New Yorkers. By clearly connecting philanthropy to tangible outcomes, whether access to legal services, healthcare, or education, we can build lasting relationships grounded in shared values and trust. That kind of engagement leads to meaningful, sustained impact.
 

Q: What’s a lesson you’ve learned during your fundraising career that continues to shape how you lead?

A: Listening is so much more powerful than speaking first. The most effective strategies and strongest partnerships emerge when we take the time to understand what motivates people and what they truly need. Whether working with donors, leading teams, or engaging with stakeholders, thoughtful listening builds trust and helps identify where we can make the greatest difference.
 

Q: What would you like CSS supporters to know about how their contributions make a difference behind the scenes?

A: Every contribution to CSS supports real, life-changing work — from expanding access to healthcare, reducing crippling educational debt, or promoting economic stability. Supporters help provide flexible resources and infrastructure that allows CSS to respond quickly, strengthen partnerships, and sustain programs that support individuals, families, and communities across New York. I’m deeply committed to ensuring supporters understand the impact of their giving and how it contributes to a more resilient, inclusive city.
 

Q: What does it mean to you to build a more equitable New York?

A: It means ensuring all New Yorkers have access to the resources they need to thrive — regardless of the barriers they face. Equity is about creating fair pathways to education, healthcare, legal support, and economic opportunity by listening to communities and responding to their strengths and priorities. When we invest in people, we strengthen the city as a whole, and CSS is uniquely positioned to lead that work.
 

Q: When you’re not working, what’s your favorite way to unwind or recharge?

A: I am constantly organizing some activity or some social event either with my family or friends. Most of my time outside work revolves around my kids sports — whether it’s driving them to their next practice or game, or cheering from the sidelines, I love to be involved in their activities.  I also love traveling with my family — we try to go to a new destination together every year. And we are always active, whether that’s hiking or spending time at the shore. I also make time to run, swim, and practice yoga.

Child care is the Mount Everest of economic policy challenges. It’s a financial burden that cuts across all races, neighborhoods and income brackets.  Day care is unaffordable for nearly everyone.  It is without doubt the most worthy of Mamdani’s attention in the early days of his administration. 

Mamdani and Governor Kathy Hochul deserve credit for announcing an initiative to provide free child care for 2-year-olds in New York City, and strengthen early childhood education.  It is the first step, they said, toward universal free child care statewide for children ages six weeks to five years old.  They want to join New Mexico, which was the first state to offer all families free universal childcare.

Mamdani has made child care a cornerstone of his affordability push.  Several of his appointees and top campaign aides worked in early childhood education or helped secure funding for former Mayor Bill de Blasio’s universal prekindergarten program. They know universal child care will take time and have no illusions about the challenges ahead.

Governor Hochul deserves credit for committing to work with the new mayor on such a difficult issue ahead of what may be a tough reelection run next year.  She has already launched a multi-year effort to rebuild the state’s child-care infrastructure decimated by the COVID pandemic.  Universal child care could cost as much as $15 billion, which requires the solid backing of the governor as well as the state legislature. 

Let’s acknowledge the obvious: This will not be easy.  The program Mamdani envisions faces significant financial hurdles.  How to pay for it remains an open question.   In New York City alone, universal child care could cost as much as $6 billion.  Then there are logistical issues, like seats for students with disabilities and a mismatch between child care supply and demand across neighborhoods.

Finding a solution for New York, however difficult, is worth the risk. The average child-care expense for families in the city is around $26,000 for infants and toddlers, according to the Citizens’ Committee for Children of New York.   That’s fourfold the seven percent of household income that the federal government deems affordable.  Unfortunately, child-care costs continue to rise faster than overall inflation in most U.S. states.  

In New York and 40 other states, the average annual price of center-based infant care costs more than in-state, four-year university tuition.  In New York City, clearly, those prices mean child care is out of reach for low-income families, immigrants and essential workers.   

We need government to support the care and education of young children, for the good of families and all the societal advantages that flow from stable homes and supportive environments for children and working parents.  It improves the parents’ ability to find meaningful work and benefits care providers, who overwhelmingly tend to be Black women.  The absence of child care also undercuts hard-fought gains for women in the workplace.

The strategies embraced nationally to address the child-care crisis include federal tax credits to offset costs, boosting wages to attract and retain child-care workers, encouraging businesses to provide on-site day care, and grants that help licensed providers cover rent, utilities and operating costs to keep their doors open.  Still others call for new federal child-care and education savings accounts.

President Donald Trump calls affordability “a fake word.”  But economic data and public polls show that Americans are struggling:  Income is barely keeping up with persistent inflation, as day-to-day basics are getting more expensive. Food, transportation and housing are increasing, and child-care and elder-care costs have skyrocketed. 

The affordability crisis turned into a political calamity for former Mayor Eric Adams, after he cut funding from the city’s popular preschool program. In his final year in office, Adams was forced to reallocate $167 million to permanent early childhood funding and $10 million for a universal child care pilot program after pushback from city lawmakers and parents.  Mamdani should extend the $10 million pilot, which offers free child care to parents in high-need areas with children up to age two.

Taking on child care in such a conspicuous way says a lot about the type of mayor Mamdani intends to become.  Elected leaders repeatedly come face-to-face again and again with the same choice: do the right thing or do the expedient thing for the right reasons. 

The mayor’s campaign promises inspired many, and he appears to not be cynically retreating from his child care ambitions in the face of unfavorable budget math.  To do otherwise so early in his term would be hollow and damaging.

Now is the right time for serious political consideration of new funding and delivery models for child care.

A new report from the Community Service Society (CSS) makes this clear. Drawing on a statewide survey of New Yorkers, and reflecting trends seen nationwide, the report finds that more than a third of moderate-income residents are relying, at higher rates than both lower- and higher- income groups, on short-term debt like BNPL just to cover basic expenses. This suggests a widening policy gap: moderate-income households are excluded from most safety-net programs yet are still unable to meet basic expenses without taking on debt.

National data tell a similar story: lower income households, people without emergency savings, and those with constrained access to traditional credit are far more likely to turn to BNPL.

And the racial dimensions cannot be ignored. Research shows that Black and Hispanic consumers, particularly Black and Hispanic women, are more likely to use BNPL than their white counterparts.

What makes BNPL uniquely troubling is not that people use it, but that people increasingly use it for groceries and other basic needs. When financing your weekly food bill becomes routine, we should stop talking about consumer choice and start talking about systemic failure.

The CSS report’s findings about short-term debt mirror broader national patterns of consumer stress. Even Federal Reserve research shows that many people who use BNPL do so because they simply can’t afford the purchase any other way.

This trend is tied to decades of stagnating wages, rising costs, and shrinking safety nets. This is not about irresponsible spending. It is about survival in a city and state where the cost of living has far outpaced wages, particularly for low-income households and communities of color.

In neighborhoods across the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and beyond, families already stretched thin by rent increases, medical bills, and childcare costs are using BNPL to bridge gaps in cash flow. For many, it feels like the only option left when paychecks don’t stretch far enough.

When so much of a household’s income is consumed by these fixed costs, even small, unexpected expenses like a winter coat or prescription can push families into borrowing.

New York is leading the way in regulating Buy Now, Pay Later with its 2025 BNPL Act, which creates the nation’s first state licensing and oversight system for BNPL providers, giving the Department of Financial Services authority to regulate these products and curb hidden costs and over-borrowing by requiring clearer disclosures, consumer protections, and limits on fees and practices.

But if we want fewer New Yorkers relying on Buy Now, Pay Later to get by, we must tackle the root causes of financial precarity. Our elected officials in Albany and New York City must redouble their efforts to address people’s financial stress by investing in truly affordable housing and strengthening tenant protections, reducing out-of-pocket healthcare, and making education affordable, from early childhood programs to college and workforce training.

Real economic security means that no one has to buy now and pay later just to live today. Let’s build an economy where working New Yorkers can thrive without debt looming over every purchase.

We are especially grateful for the increase in funding for the Education Debt Consumer Assistance Program (EDCAP) to $6 million. This expanded investment recognizes student debt as a critical higher education issue and will allow EDCAP to expand its reach and impact across the postsecondary system. With these resources, the program can help more students and borrowers navigate the complex student loan landscape, avoid predatory practices, and secure meaningful relief—supporting college access and long‑term economic stability.

CSS also applauds the governor for sustaining $5.5 million in funding for Community Health Advocates and $3 million for the Community Health Access to Addiction and Mental Healthcare Project (CHAMP). At a time when more than 1.7 million New Yorkers are at risk of losing their health coverage because of federal cuts through H.R.1, this funding ensures that consumers can receive trusted, one-on-one assistance to understand their rights, navigate transitions, and maintain access to affordable, quality health coverage and care.

We are thankful for Governor Hochul’s commitment to extend state-only Medicaid coverage to lawfully present immigrants currently enrolled in the Essential Plan who will lose eligibility because of President Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” by reverting to the program’s original Basic Health Program. This action reflects New York’s longstanding leadership in protecting access to health coverage for immigrant New Yorkers and mitigating the harm of federal policy changes. However, we remain concerned that the budget does not address the plight of roughly 450,000 citizens and lawfully present New Yorkers who face mid-summer disruptions in coverage, being forced to either go uninsured or pay hundreds of dollars monthly for health plans with high deductibles on the NY State of Health Marketplace. Without a clear plan or dedicated funding to cover this population, hundreds of thousands of families will face a healthcare affordability crisis that will jeopardize their health, financial stability, and overall economic security.

While we commend the governor’s ongoing commitment to housing stability through continued support for the Housing Access Voucher Program (HAVP), more must be done to meet the scale of New York’s housing crisis. We join with homeless New Yorkers, at-risk renters, shelter-providers, and building owners in calling for an increase in rental assistance funding. In the face of callous federal cuts, particularly to housing for the formerly homeless, New York must increase its allocation for HAVP to $250 million and make the program permanent so that it can be used to finance the production of urgently needed affordable housing using project-based vouchers.

Finally, we also commend the governor for enabling timely repairs of rent stabilized buildings with the reauthorization of the J51 program. This version of the generous tax break has been retooled to support building upkeep, without causing tenant displacement.

CSS looks forward to working with the Governor and the State Legislature to build on these investments and ensure the final budget advances economic security, health access, and housing stability for all New Yorkers.

Since its inception, EDCAP has served as a national model, saving New Yorkers more than $48 million by helping borrowers enter repayment, avoid delinquency, recover from default, and protect themselves from predatory practices. Today, New York ranks sixth nationally in federal student loan debt, with 2.4 million borrowers owing $98 billion.

With repayment now resumed and federal relief programs ended, borrowers face rising defaults, increasingly complex repayment systems, widespread misinformation, and aggressive scams—making trusted, timely guidance more critical than ever. Early intervention is essential. Programs like EDCAP, working with higher education institutions, ensure borrowers receive accurate, timely information and personalized support to manage their debt effectively. This collaboration is also key to guaranteeing that New Yorkers see a true return on their investment in higher education, rather than being saddled with unmanageable student debt.

We applaud Governor Hochul for recognizing the urgency of this moment and investing in EDCAP’s expansion. This action reaffirms New York’s leadership in protecting student borrowers and promoting long-term financial stability.

###

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion an equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. By expanding access to health care, affordable housing, employment opportunities, debt assistance, and more, we make a tangible difference in the lives of millions. Join us at www.cssny.org.

Affordability remains top of mind for New Yorkers across the state, and it was a central theme of Mayor Mamdani’s campaign. Rising child care costs are a significant driver of financial stress for families, pushing many households to the brink—even when they are employed full time.

Drawing on data from CSS’s statewide Annual Survey of Housing and Economic Security, fielded with a representative sample of 4,000 New Yorkers, our recent report, ‘How Are People Supposed to Get Ahead?’ Financial Precarity Among New York State Residents, finds that financial precarity in New York extends well beyond those living in poverty. Low-,moderate-, and even higher-income households report struggling to cover essential costs—including housing, health care, child care, utilities, and food—while also facing unpredictable expenses and growing debt. This reality underscores the need for universal programs that reach across income bands to provide meaningful relief. Universal child care is a critical step toward that goal.

Additional research from FPWA, our partner in the national True Cost of Living coalition, reinforces this need. Their recent report shows that for New York City households with children, child care consumes roughly 14 percent of annual household resources, placing an enormous strain on family budgets.

CSS commends Governor Hochul and Mayor Mamdani for their leadership in moving universal child care forward. This investment will help families across income levels, support economic stability, and strengthen long-term economic security for New Yorkers.

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion an equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. By expanding access to health care, affordable housing, employment opportunities, debt assistance, and more, we make a tangible difference in the lives of millions. Join us at www.cssny.org

Consider the latest youth labor data: It shows New York City’s unemployment rate for 16–24-year-olds at 13.2 percent in 2024, with Black youth facing a staggering 23.8 percent — nine points higher than in 2019. These numbers are a barometer for broader labor-market fragility. When young Black New Yorkers struggle to get a foothold, future workforce strength, household income stability, and citywide economic competitiveness are all at risk. 

NYC’s overall unemployment was 5.1 percent in September 2025, while Black unemployment hovered around 8.3 percent. Still, the city recorded record highs in total jobs. However, those figures mask persistent racial gaps in the labor market. Entry-level retail jobs, which many Black youth rely on to build experience, remain far below pre-pandemic levels. At the same time, many entry-level jobs are shrinking as a result of AI and automation, hitting young workers the hardest. 

Black unemployment rates are also driven by long-standing structural issues. A 2020 report by the Center for an Urban Future documented stark disparities in employment and wages for Black New Yorkers. It cited gaps in educational attainment as a big driver, as well as similar findings found in our own 2025 housing and economic security survey: hiring practices that disadvantage Black candidates, unequal access to peer networks and mentorship, and the ongoing impacts of racism.

In the CSS survey, we asked unemployed New Yorkers what the two biggest challenges they faced when it came to finding and keeping a good job. Twenty-five percent of Black respondents said they don’t have the work experience employers are asking for, compared to 17 percent of White respondents and 13 percent of Hispanic respondents. Nearly 30 percent of Blacks said they lack personal connections or professional networks, compared to 23 percent of Whites and 15 percent of Hispanics. And 20 percent of Black respondents said they faced discrimination based on age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or immigration status, compared to 13 percent of Whites and 19 percent of Hispanics. 

The structural drivers of the city’s labor market inequality is not a secret. Occupational segregation and significant underrepresentation of Black workers in higher-paying fields like finance, tech, and information systems remain entrenched. In NYC, Black New Yorkers hold an outsized small share of well-paid industry roles despite making up roughly a fifth of the workforce. This isn’t merely about pay gaps, but about the distribution of opportunity across sectors that set the city’s income trajectories. Nationally, tech and finance pipelines are equally skewed, with persistent representation gaps and advancement barriers for Black professionals in high-growth, high-wage occupations. 

Education is the City’s On-Ramp to Good Jobs

Last week, Mayor Mamdani named Kamar Samuels as the city’s new Schools Chancellor. Mr. Samuels has a daunting task given all the critical needs of the city’s school system. Among them is developing solutions for widespread chronic absenteeism, with the highest rates among Black and Hispanic high school students. If the city fails to tackle chronic absenteeism now, it weakens the tech, finance, and information workforce pipeline a decade from now. 

Research consistently shows that long spells out of work depress lifetime earnings, with impacts persisting for years. Out-of- School/Out-of-Work rates remain high for young Black New Yorkers. Left unaddressed, these patterns increase the risk of criminal justice system involvement, state dependence, and compounding of inequality over the long-term. 

The good news is Mayor Mamdani campaigned and won on a platform of attacking the city’s affordability crisis, which gives his new administration the political capital to take on Black unemployment as part of a broader effort to build a more inclusive economy. To that end, the Mamdani administration should treat the 2025 rise in Black adult and youth unemployment as an early warning and respond with targeted, measurable interventions. Besides addressing chronic absenteeism among Black and Latino high school students, we urge the new administration to: 

Fund mentorship-driven pipelines into tech and information careers at scale; encourage more of the city’s tech companies to participate in the City’s Summer Youth Employment Program (SYEP) to develop talent pipelines from underrepresented communities; stabilize entry-level jobs by partnering with employers to protect the on-ramps to retail and hospitality sectors while accelerating transitions into health care, green energy, and information sectors where jobs are expanding; use targeted wage subsidies and hiring credits for youth to create pathways into high-wage sectors; and fund and promote skill-bridging bootcamps that can help Black jobseekers close the skills gap and pivot into better-paying roles with advancement ladders.

The choice before city leaders in 2026 is stark: hope for a market driven course-correction that miraculously reverses rising Black unemployment or treat it as the warning signal it is and build the policies that ensure every New Yorker has a fair shot at the jobs shaping our future. 

Over her decades-long career, Chief Bonsignore steadily moved up the ranks, first as an EMT, then lieutenant, captain and deputy chief. She responded to the Sept. 11 World Trade Center terror attack, oversaw the training and certification of thousands of EMTs as assistant deputy chief, was on the frontlines during the COVID pandemic, and was a staunch advocate for raising the pay of EMS workers.  

The majority of FDNY’s workload involves calls to EMS, which disproportionately serves low- and middle-income new Yorkers in the outer boroughs. Appointing a commissioner with deep experience in this work demonstrates a real commitment to serving all New Yorkers.  

The brave and dedicated men and women who work in the city’s police, fire and emergency services departments should better reflect the city they serve. For too long, the FDNY has resisted change and diversity while tolerating overt sexism and racism. With the selection of Chief Bonsignore, the new mayor is making clear that he wants a commissioner who will bring a forward-thinking, reform-minded agenda to the department. We applaud him. 

David R. Jones is President and CEO of the Community Service Society of New York (CSS); Laura Kavanagh was FDNY Commissioner under Mayor Adams and is a CSS Board Trustee.  

One in three public school kids last year was chronically absent, missing at least 10 percent of school days, according to New York City Department of Education data. That’s considerably higher than pre-pandemic levels, especially in schools with low math and reading scores and high rates of homelessness.

Alarmingly, just over 40 percent of Black and Latinx children citywide last year were chronically absent, according to NYCDOE figures.  Academics are nearly united in the opinion that the problem is bigger than a simple hangover from COVID, the once-in-a-generation crisis that interrupted the educations of young people and crippled their family finances.

New York’s absenteeism crisis deserves a prominent spot in the education agenda of Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, who has an opportunity to use his charisma, energetic youth and political capital to rally the city behind school reform and expanding opportunities for our young people.

Absenteeism needs his attention because the cost of falling behind for children of color is lethal. Nationwide, schools are less likely to offer Black and Latinx students eighth-grade algebra, limiting odds they will get into advanced high school courses, pursue STEM majors in college and earn more money as adults, according to research from NWEA, a national testing group.

Mamdani’s campaign on affordability draws a direct line to improving the lives of NYC children. The mayor-elect, who attended Bronx High School of Science, certainly knows New York families are struggling to provide for their children. Our city’s livability depends on good schools, boosting the ranks of college-bound students and providing experiences needed to land employment, on-the-job training or trade school after high school.

Last winter, NCES released the results of its semiannual reading and math tests of fourth- and eighth-graders, assessments that are considered the most authoritative measure of the state of learning in American elementary and middle schools. The results, which may be NCES’s last since Trump decided to dismantle the agency, were troubling. In nearly every category, the scores had plunged to levels unseen for decades — or ever. On reading tests, 40 percent of fourth graders and one-third of eighth graders performed below “basic,” the lowest threshold. A separate assessment of 12th-graders conducted this past spring — the first since schools were shuttered by the COVID pandemic — yielded similarly crushing results.

Mayor-elect Mamdani has decisions to make. He has not stated his intention to retain or replace Melissa Aviles-Ramos, the current chancellor. He has also not detailed his preferences for control of the schools. He may seek to retain power through appointment of the schools’ chancellor or shift authority to elected school boards or other entities. Mayor Bloomberg used mayoral control to generate private-sector support for the public schools and promote innovation. Mayor-elect Mamdani may opt to do the same, while also delegating more authority to local community boards.

He may also face taking steps to fill the void caused by the demise of DOE and NCES, such as authoring studies or partnering with nonprofits, foundations and universities to create programs focused on the needs of kids in the five boroughs.

Hope is not lost, even in the face of Trump’s assault on education [JP1] and[JP2]  the school system’s troubling absenteeism crisis. Mamdani has options. The mayor-elect and his supporters can take dramatic steps to turn things around for our kids.

New York City has done it before. We can do it again.

This drastic reduction is not a mere budgetary adjustment—it is a deliberate retreat from addressing the health inequities that have plagued Black and Brown communities for decades. And it is rooted in a divisive, false narrative that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies are somehow antithetical to excellence in science.

Let’s be clear: DEI is not a political slogan. It is a framework for ensuring that research reflects the lived realities of all Americans, not just the privileged few. Yet, under the Trump Administration’s rhetoric—casting DEI as “woke ideology” and “illegal discrimination”—critical funding streams have been gutted. The result? Fewer resources to study conditions that disproportionately affect minority populations, such as Sickle Cell Disease, Black maternal mortality, hypertension, and diabetes. These are not abstract issues; they are matters of life and death.

Consider Sickle Cell Disease, a genetic disorder that primarily affects African Americans causing its patients to suffer severe discomfort in the arms, legs, chest, extreme fatigue, anemia, jaundice and swollen extremities. While breakthroughs in gene therapy offer hope, these treatments remain experimental and expensive. Continued research is essential to make them accessible and safe. Cutting grants means slowing progress—condemning thousands to unnecessary suffering.

Or take Black maternal health, which I have written about in this space highlighting racial bias in the delivery of healthcare and how it contributes to profound distrust of the medical establishment. The United States already has the highest maternal mortality rate among developed nations, and Black women are three to 3.5 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related complications than their White counterparts. These disparities stem from systemic racism, implicit bias in healthcare, and socioeconomic barriers. Without robust, targeted research, we cannot design interventions to save lives. These are preventable deaths. Reducing funding now is akin to the nation turning its back on mothers and babies who need these services the most.

Hypertension and cardiovascular disease tell a similar story. African Americans experience higher rates of both, leading to premature deaths and diminished quality of life. These conditions are influenced by complex interactions of genetics, environment, and social determinants of health. Cutting research dollars means fewer studies on culturally tailored interventions, fewer community-based programs, and ultimately, more preventable deaths.

The False Narrative Driving This Retreat

The justification for these cuts rests on a pernicious myth: that DEI initiatives dilute scientific rigor. Nothing could be further from the truth. Diversity in research teams and study populations enhances innovation and validity. When trials exclude minority participants, findings often fail to accurately reflect the broader population — leading to treatments that work well for some but not for all. DEI is not charity; it is a scientific necessity.

Yet, political rhetoric has weaponized the term, painting DEI as a partisan agenda rather than a public health imperative. 

Under President Trump’s executive orders, federal agencies dismantled diversity programs, eliminated DEI offices, and revoked equity-related grants—framing inclusion efforts as discriminatory or “illegal”. This framing ignores decades of evidence showing that inclusive research saves lives. It also disregards the moral obligation of a government to serve all its citizens, not just those who fit a narrow demographic mold.

The origins of the NIMHD go back to 1990 and its forerunner the Office of Minority Programs housed inside the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It’s mission – to confront health disparities head-on — is not optional; it is foundational to a fair and effective healthcare system. Slashing its grant portfolio by more than half sends a chilling message that the health of minority communities is expendable. This is not just bad policy—it is dangerous governance.

And the ramifications of this kind of short-sighted, racially motivated decision-making will be profound. Young scientists committed to studying health equity will face dwindling opportunities, pushing talent out of the field. Community organizations that partner with researchers will lose vital support. And patients—real people with real needs—will pay the ultimate price.

Public health is not a partisan issue; it is a national priority. Lawmakers must restore funding to NIMHD and reaffirm the value of DEI in research. Philanthropic organizations and private sectors should step in to fill gaps, but they cannot replace the scale and stability of federal investment. Most importantly, we must challenge the false narratives that equate inclusion with mediocrity. 

It’s a testament to how far we have regressed as a country that we have to even debate this issue. Science thrives on diversity—of thought, of experience, of perspective. The health of our nation depends on it.

A new Community Service Society of New York (CSS) report finds that financial precarity in New York State is no longer confined to those in poverty but increasingly affects households across income levels. To bridge gaps in household budgets and keep up with routine costs, many New Yorkers are relying on short-term debt as a survival strategy—creating new obstacles to achieving economic security.

 The report, “How Are People Supposed to Get Ahead?’ Financial Precarity Among New York State Residents,” draws on data from CSS’s statewide Annual Survey of Housing and Economic Security, fielded in September and October 2025 with a representative sample of 4,000 adult New Yorkers.

One of the report’s central findings is that financial precarity in New York extends well beyond those living in poverty. Low-, moderate-, and even higher-income households report struggling to manage essential costs (e.g., utilities, housing, healthcare, food, and transportation) while also facing unpredictable expenses and rising debt. For example:

• Thirty-six percent of respondents reported that they cannot make ends meet or are barely getting by; that figure rises to 60 percent among those earning up to 200 percent of the federal poverty level, while one in five higher-income respondents also report short-term financial strain.
• More than a quarter (27 percent) of moderate-income respondents said they could not or probably could not cover a $400 emergency expense.
• One in four respondents reported having no emergency savings at all.
• Forty-one percent of those not currently retired are not saving for retirement.
• Sixty-one percent report having credit card debt.
• More than a third of moderate-income New Yorkers rely on short-term debt such as credit-cards, Buy Now Pay Later apps, and cash advances to cover expenses.

 The report features New Yorkers from around the state describing the pressures behind these numbers:

• “Groceries are too high. Medical insurance, car insurance is extremely high. Electric bills have gone up. We need all of these to come down so we can have a life, not just work to pay bills.” – NYC resident
• “We can’t be expected to work paycheck to paycheck and live in anxiety over our expenses. Everyone deserves peace of mind.” – Westchester resident
• “In this day and age, it’s too easy to fall into debt and nearly impossible to climb back out. […] we tread water to survive.” – Albany resident
• “The jobs we have don’t pay enough for us to live debt free.” – NYC resident
• “Even when you do what they say and work 40 hours a week, you still can’t survive but you make ‘too much’ for help.” – Saratoga County resident
• “The hardest part isn’t dealing with the expenses you know are coming, it’s the emergency and surprise expenses that hold you back from achieving your goals. By helping people with the bigger burden, those expected expenses, you could help them deal with the surprise expenses.” – Erie County resident
• “We need to raise the minimum wage, have universal health care and rent control.” – Erie County resident
• “I wish elected officials better understood how hard it is for many people to get ahead financially, even when they work full-time. Wages often don’t keep up with the rising costs of housing, healthcare, education, and everyday expenses. Many families live paycheck to paycheck and can’t save for emergencies or the future.” – NYC resident
• “The cost of everything has risen, and folks that depend on Social Security are being underserved. The COLA increases are not realistic and do not reflect the actual cost of living for seniors.” – Long Island resident

“For more than two decades, CSS has asked everyday New Yorkers about their economic realities through our annual survey,” said David R. Jones, President and CEO of CSS. “This year, residents across the state shared how soaring utility bills, food prices, property taxes, and medical and education debt are undermining their ability to save for the future. These pressures are shaping daily life for working households across the state.”

“One of the most striking findings is how many moderate-income households are falling through the cracks. They earn too much to qualify for safety-net programs yet still can’t cover basic expenses without taking on debt,” said Rachel Swaner, CSS Vice President for Policy, Research and Advocacy and author of the report. “That’s a warning sign that our current approach to economic security is falling short, and that government policies must confront the broader structural conditions keeping so many New Yorkers on precarious footing.”

The report findings point to the need for a comprehensive agenda that addresses the rising cost of living, stabilizes incomes, and reduces households’ reliance on debt. With bold policy choices, New York can create a more stable foundation that allows households across the income spectrum to save, plan, and get ahead.

 ###

The Community Service Society of New York (CSS) has worked with and for New Yorkers since 1843 to promote economic opportunity and champion an equitable city and state. We power change through a strategic combination of research, services, and advocacy to make New York more livable for people facing economic insecurity. By expanding access to health care, affordable housing, employment opportunities, debt assistance, and more, we make a tangible difference in the lives of millions. Join us at www.cssny.org.

Awardees:

Arab-American Family Support Center

Council Of Peoples Organization, Inc.

Emerald Isle Immigration Center

Health and Welfare Council of Long Island

Healthy Community Alliance, Inc.

Korean Community Services of Metropolitan New York, Inc.

Make the Road New York

Maximizing Independent Living Choices

Mothers & Babies Perinatal Network of SCNY, Inc.

William F. Ryan Community Health Center, Inc.

South Asian Council for Social Services

The Community Service Society (CSS) invites non-profit community-based enrollment organizations to participate in a unique opportunity to receive funding for outreach and marketing of enrollment services through the grant-funded Keep New York Covered (KNYC) project.

In March 2023, CSS launched the KNYC project in partnership with a consortium of eight private foundations to promote awareness about the need for New York consumers to renew their coverage once the federal Public Health Emergency (PHE) ended. The KNYC project funded 36 community-based organizations (CBOs) that were able to conduct nearly 69 million outreach touchpoints with New Yorkers through in-person events, social media posts, and paid advertising. This marketing effort led to the renewal of more than 103,000 people since March 2023.

While the PHE unwind has come to an end, many New Yorkers still need help with understanding how to maintain their coverage during their next recertification process, navigating benefit and programmatic changes, and preparing for possible shortfalls in federal premium assistance funding. The passage of H.R. 1 further underscores the urgency of these challenges, as federal policy changes may affect eligibility and coverage for vulnerable communities. You can view the RFP here.

Q&A

Q: Will you be selecting a smaller number of CBOs for Y4?

Yes, due to limited funding, we anticipate selecting between 6 to 10 CBOs to ensure that each receives adequate support and resources.

Q: Can my agency apply for less than $20k?

Yes, you are welcome to request less than $20,000. We encourage applicants to request the amount that best aligns with their proposed scope of work and organizational capacity.

Q: We are very interested in applying, but we are no longer health navigators; we are currently just Certified Application Counselors (CAC). Would a CAC work for this contract as well?

Due to limited resources, CSS is strongly prioritizing Navigator and FEABD organizations for this grant.

Q: Can we use the media content (ads, video, radio) that was already used previously in our KNYC campaigns, or will we need new material to reflect a different message or phrase for the new contract year?

There is not a specific message or phrase required in new outreach materials. However, if awarded, we ask that all previously used KNYC marketing materials be adjusted as necessary for the new contract period and submitted to CSS for approval.

Q: Are you planning to award new contracts in this upcoming round?

CSS plans to prioritize applications from previous KNYC applicants, but new applications are definitely welcome. Immigrant serving groups are strongly encouraged to apply. We’ve seen a high interest in this grant and anticipate that many previous KNYC grantees will submit applications.

Q: The RFP indicates the 2nd page of the Cover Form is not needed if not using a Fiscal Conduit. Is it correct that organizations NOT using a fiscal conduit do not need to submit this signature page (i.e., no signature needed from Board Chair and CEO)?

Correct, organizations not applying fiscal conduit do not need to submit this signature page (Cover Form Page 2).

Q: We struggled to meet our enrollment deliverables during our previous participation in the program. What are the deliverable expectations for this grant?

Enrollment deliverables are set by each agency. We ask everyone to estimate how many enrollments they anticipate resulting from the KNYC-funded outreach. We then use those self-reported metrics to help measure progress.

Q: What is the financial invoicing process for this grant?

We only request an invoice at three different times during the grant; no backup is required.